MM  4-1 


UC-NRLF 


B    3    110    173 


LIBRARY 

OF  THIC 

University  of  California. 


i^-i^  (9St:^A^vi^i^^  ^/Oi^iJiLr^^ 


%eceived       iAVcL.<^  .  i8()3  . 


» 


THE  HISTORICAL  DEVELOPMENT 


OP   THE 


POSSESSIVE    PRONOUNS 


IN  ITALIAN 


DISSERT  A.TION 

PRESENTED  TO  THE  BOARD  OF  UNIVERSITY  STUDIES 

OF  THE  JOHNS  HOPKINS  UNIVERSITY  FOR  THE 

DEGREE  OF  DOCTOR  OF  PHILOSOPHY 


BY 

LOUI8  EMIL  MENGER 

LATE   FELLOW   IN   THE   JOHNS   HOPKINS   UNIVERSITY 


h  a  i,  t  i  m  o  r  k 
The  Modekn  Language  Association  of  America 

1883 


77-9 


JOHN   MUKPHY    h  CO.,  PEIKTERS, 


BALTIMORE. 


TO 

My  Father, 
PROFESSOR  EMIL  MENGER, 

Clinton,  Mississippi, 

to  whose  sympathy  and  aid  i  am  largely  indebted  fok 

what  i  may  have  accomplished 

in  my  studies, 

THIS  MONOGRAPH  IS  AFFECTIONATELY  DEDICATED. 


^^-^   0?  THS     *^ 

((UHIVBRSI7Y1 


i. 


v^^^.5*L^^ 


X   - 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 


Page. 

Introduction.    List  of  texts l~" 

I. — Chapter  I.      Irregular  forms  of  the  Possessive  Pro- 
nouns   0-61 

1.  Collection  of  all  irregular  uses  in  texts  examined 6-16 

2.  Irregularities  in  the  Singular  discussed 17 

a.    Found  to  have  no  explanation  in  common  with  that 

for  like  forms  in  the  plural,  especially  for  mia,  tua, 

sua  ;  therefore  irregularities  for  the  singular  may 

:  be  eliminated  in  the  consideration  of  irregularities 

for  the  plural •^^ 

3.  Irregularities  in  the  Plural;    notice  taken  by  early  gram- 

marians of  the  plural  mia,  tua,  .ma 22 

4.  Unsatisfactory  explanation  by  later  grammarians  of  mia, 

tua,  sua 22-28 

rt.    mei  >  j/urt  by  analogy  to  lei^-lia 23 

b.  Kesult  of  position  in  stress-group  25 

c.  Phonetical  reductions 26 

d.  mia  adopted  from  a  confusion  of  mie'  =  viiei  and  mie' 

=  mia  (Sing.) 26 

5.  These  forms  (No.  3)  are  remnants  of  the  Latin  Neuter 

Plural..... : • -8 

a.   Time  of  appearance ;   extent  of  employ ;   originated 

among  the  people  ;   conclusion 30 

II._Chaptek   II.     Regular  forms  of  the   Possessive  Pro- 
nouns   32-69 

A.   First  Person,  mio,  miei ;  tonic  E  and  i  in  hiatus 32-52 

1.  Previous  treatment  of  hiatus  E 32 

a.    Examples 33-39 

2.  Hiatus  prevents  the  development  of  I  >  <■ 39 

3.  Hiatus  closes  E  >  i  before  a,  e,  0 42 

o.    Ex.  Conditionals  in -no  < -reo 43 

V 


VI  TABLE    OF    CONTENTS. 

PAGE. 

4.  E  and  ^  before  i  >  ie 47 

a.   Question  of  *mieo  <  MEUS 48 

5.  Texts  examined  contain  sufficient  material  for  ex- 

planations of  all  forms  studied  without  recourse 

to  constructive  forms 49 

6.  Conclusions 51 

B.   Second  and  Third  Persons,  luo,  tuoi ;  suo,  suoi ;  tonic  v  in 

hiatus ' 52-69 

1.  Previous  explanations  rejected 52 

2.  Uses  in  texts  consulted 54 

3.  toi,  .so/  are  directly  <  xui,  sui 56 

a.    Parallel  forms  tovum  tuum,  sovum  suum 56 

6.   Close  phonetic  relation  of  hiatus  o  and  u 57 

4.  0  before  I  >■  0  and  diphthongizes 57 

5.  Influence  of  v  element  in  developments  like  bue  < 

buvp;m 58 

a.  Comparison  with  puoi  <  poi  <  post  shows  v 

element  to  be  unnecessary 59 

6.  0  before  other  vowels  >  w 60 

a.  tui,  bui,  nui,  etc 61 

b.  The  feminine  plurals  lae,  .sue,  and  jthe  mascu- 

line sing,  too,  SMO,  etc 63 

C   Tonic  u  in  hiatus  remains  in  Tuscan 64 

Conclusions 64 


,  .^^   01  XHS       •««' 

THE  HISTORICAL  DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE 
POSSESSIVE  PRONOUNS  IN  ITALIAN. 

From  the  Middle  of  the  Thirteenth  to  the  End 
OF  THE  Sixteenth  Century. 


Introduction. 


The  Possessive  Pronouns  existing  in  literary  Italian  are 


mw 

meum, 

miei 

MEI, 

tuo 

TUUM, 

tuoi 

tui, 

suo 

SUUM, 

suoi 

SUI, 

nostro 

NOSTRUM, 

nostri 

NOSTRI, 

vostro 

VOSTRUM, 

vostri 

VOSTRI, 

mm 

MEAM, 

mie 

MEAE, 

tua 

TUAM, 

tue 

TUAE, 

sua 

SUAM, 

sue 

SUAE, 

nostra 

NOSTRAM, 

nostre 

NOSTRAE, 

vostra 

VOSTRAM, 

vostre 

VOSTRAE. 

These  literary  forms,  as  given,  are  found  in  the  earliest  texts. 
But  a  mere  casual  reading  of  the  texts  will  reveal  also  many 
variants;  this  makes  evident  the  fact  that  a  succession  of  stages 
or  steps  was  gone  through  before  the  above  forms  were  adopted 

1 


2  T..    EMIL    MENGER. 

as  the  regular  ones.  The  simplest  method  to  be  followed  in 
discovering  what  these  successive  stages  of  development  were 
must  be  to  begin  with  the  earliest  texts  in  which  the  variants 
were  sometimes  the  rule,  and  follow  the  occurrence  of  these 
variants  in  chronological  order  down  into  those  texts  in  which 
they  are  exceptions ;  thus  finally  arriving  at  literary  monu- 
ments in  which  no  variants  occur,  but  where  they  have  been 
merged  completely  into  the  prevailing  literary  forms. 

Such  a  study  involves  the  investigation  of  one  of  the  most 
interesting  and  difficult  questions  of  Italian  Philology ;  namely, 
the  development  of  the  Latin  hiatus  vowels  e  and  u. 

In  the  course  of  a  research  carried  on  as  just  suggested  are 
discovered  irregular  forms  which  appear  and  disappear  without 
any  apparent  preceding  stage,  and  leaving  no  successors  on  their 
disappearance.  At  a  certain  time  in  the  history  of  the  Italian 
language  there  is  a  frequent  use  of  the  anomalous  mia,  tvxi, 
sua;  they  are  found  with  the  plurals  of  masculine  and  femi- 
nine nouns  alike.  This  is  the  sole  marked  irregularity  in 
the  use  of  plural  Possessive  Pronouns  in  Italian,  and  for  a 
full  understanding  of  the  general  subject  of  the  pronoun  in 
this  language,  the  appearance  of  these  abnormal  forms  must  be 
accounted  for. 

The  study  thus  divides  itself  into  two  parts :  first,  it  must 
be  determined  what  the  irregular  forms  are  ;  they  must  be  ex- 
plained and  eliminated ;  then  the  development  of  the  regular 
forms  can  be  discovered.  A  division  of  the  material  within 
these  limits  is  carried  out  in  the  following  monograph.  In 
Chapter  I  the  irregular  mia,  tua,  sua,  and  all  irregular  uses  of 
the  Possessive  Pronouns  connected  Avith  these  forms,  are  con- 
sidered. In  Chapter  II  the  regular  developments  are  taken 
up  which  can  be  understood  only  when  definite  hiatus  laws  for 
E  and  u  have  been  established, — so  that  in  this  chapter  (II), 
in  addition  to  the  Possessive  Pronouns,  all  words  in  which 
these  hiatus  vowels  occur  are  studied.  When,  from  a  considera- 
tion of  all  the  phenomena,  the  laws  of  growth  are  discovered, 
these  laws  are  applied  to  the  development  of  the  Possessive 


ITALIAN   POSSESSIVE   PRONOUNS.  3 

Pronouns  which  are  thus  seen  to  evolve  regularly  and  accord- 
ing to  fixed  principles  from  the  Latin. 

The  following  texts  have  been  examined ;  they  comprise  the 
works  of  Tuscan  authors  for  a  period  of  three  hundred  years, 
from  Guittoue  d'Arezzo  (1250)  to  Torquato  Tasso  (1595).  As 
it  may  be  of  interest  to  students  of  Italian  to  know  where  cer- 
tain rare  editions  which  are  included  in  this  Bibliography  were 
found,  I  will  state  that  all  such  works  mentioned  were  con- 
sulted in  the  Bibliotheque  Nationale,  Paris.  There  also  are 
to  be  found  the  works  of  the  early  Italian  grammarians  who 
will  be  quoted  in  the  course  of  this  monograph.  The  authors 
will  be  referred  to  hereafter  as  A,  B,  C,  etc.,  according  to  the 
letter  of  the  alphabet  placed  in  front  of  their  names. 

A. — Guittone  d'Arezzo  :  (In)  Rime  di  diversi  antichi  autori 
Toscani  in  dieci  libri  raccolte.     Venegia,  1532. 

B. — Chiaro  Davanzati :  (In)  Collezione  di  Opere  inedite  o 
rare,     iii,  1-177;  261-265;  387-389. 

C. — Cino  da  Pistoja :  Le  Rime  di  Messer  Cino  da  Pistoja, 
ridotte  a  miglior  lezione  da  Biudi  e  Fanfani.  Pistoja,  1878. 
Also  in  A. 

D. — Riccomano  Jacopi :  Libro  della  Tavola  di  Ric.  Jac, 
edited  by  Carlo  Vesme,  (in)  Archivio  Storico  Italiano,  3*  serie, 
Vol.  XVIII  (1873). 

E.— Dante  da  Maiono:  In  A,  pp.  74-90, 134, 138, 140, 141. 

F. — Albertano  di  Brescia :  Volgarizzamento  dei  Trattati 
Morali  di  Albertano  Giudice  di  Brescia.  Fatto  innanzi  al 
1278.     Trovato  da  S.  Ciampi.     Firenze,  1832. 

G. — Ricordi  di  una  Famiglia  Senese  del  secolo  decimoterzo 
(1231-1243).  Pub.  by  G.  Milanesi  in  Archiv.  Stor.  Ital. 
Appendice,  Vol.  v.     Firenze,  1 847. 

H. — Ranieri  Sardo :  Cronaca  Pisana  di  Ran.  Sar.,  DalP 
Anno  962  sino  al  1400.  Pub.  by  F.  Bonaini  in  Archiv.  Stor. 
Ital.     Vol.  VI,  parte  2%  pp.  73-244.     Firenze,  1845. 

I. — Fiore  di  filosofi  e  di  molti  savi,  attribuito  a  Brunette 
Latini.     Testo  in  parte  inedito,  citato  dalla  Crusca,  e  ridotto  a 


4  L.    EMIL    MENGER. 

miglior  lezione  da  Antonio  Cappelli.  (In)  Scelta  di  curiosita 
letterarie  o  rare,  Vol.  lxiii.     Bologna,  1865. 

J. — Lettere  Volgari  del  secolo  xiii,  scritte  da  Senesi.  Pub. 
by  Paoli  e  Piccolomini  in  Scelta  ecc.,  cxvi.      Bologna,  1871. 

K. — Dodici  Conti  Morali  d'Anonimo  Senese.  Testo  inedito 
del  secolo  xiii,  pub.  da  Zambrini.  Scelta  ecc,  ix.  Bologna, 
1862. 

L. — Conti  di  Antichi  Cavalieri.  (In)  Giornale  Storico  della 
Letteratura  Italiana,  Vol.  iii,  pp.  192-217.     Torino,  1884. 

M. — Le  ciento  Novelle  Antike.  Bologna  (Gualteruzzi),  1 525. 

N. — La  Tavola  Ritonda,  o  I'Istoria  di  Tristano.  Pub.  in 
two  vols,  by  F.-L.  Polidori  in  Collezione  di  Opere  inedite  o 
rare.     Bologna,  1864. 

O. — Guido  Cavalcanti :  Le  Rime  di  Guid.  Cav.  Testo 
critico  pubb.  dal  Prof.  Nicola  Arnone.  Firenze,  1881.  Also 
in  A. 

P. — Dante :  Le  Prime  Quattro  Edizione  della  Divina 
Commedia  letteralmente  ristampate  per  cura  di  G.  J.  Warren, 
Baron  Vernon.     Londra,  1858. 

Q. — Petrarca  :  Rime  di  Pet.    2  vols.    Padova,  1819. 

R. — Jacopo  di  Pistoja  :  Statuti  dell'  Opera  di  S.  Jacopo  di 
Pistoja,  volgarizzati  I'anno  Mcccxiir  da  Mazzeo  di  Ser  Giovanni 
Bellebuoni,  con  due  inventarj  del  1340  e  del  1401.  Pubb.  da 
S.  Ciampi.     Pisa,  1814. 

S. — Bindo  Bonichi :  Rime  di  Bind.  Bon.  da  Siena.  Scelta 
ecc,  Lxxxii.     Bologna,  1867. 

T. — Guido  da  Pisa  :  II  Libro  chiamato  Fiore  d'ltalia. 
Bologna,  Oct.  25,  1490. 

U. — Ricordi  di  Miliadusso  Baldiccionede'  Casalberti.  Pubb. 
da  Bonaini  e  Polidori  in  Archiv.  Stor.  Ital.  Appendice,  Vol. 
viri,  pp.  17-71.  (First  record  1339,  last  1382.)  Firenze,  1850 

V. — Boccaccio  :  (1)  L'Amorosa  Fiammetta  di  Messer 
Giovanni  Boccaccio.  Vinegia,  1575. — (2)  Ameto,  over  Com- 
edia  delle  Nimphe  Florentine  compilata  da  Messer  Giov.  Bocc 
Venegia,  1534. — (3)  II  Decamerone  di  Messer  Giov.  Bocc. 
Venetia,  1471. 


.     ITALIAN   POSSESSIVE   PRONOUNS.  5 

W.— Giovanni  Fiorentino  :    11  Pecorone.    2  vols.    Milano, 

1804. 

X.— Fazio  degli  Uberti :  Opera  di  Faccio  Degliuberti  Fio- 
rentino Chiamato  Ditta  Mundi.     Venetia,  1501. 

Y. Forestani :    Storia  d'una  Fanciulla  Tradita  da  un  suo 

Amante.      Di  Messer  Simone  Forestani  da  Siena.      Ed.  da 
Zambrini.     Scelta  ecc,  VI.     Bologna,  1862. 

Z. — Sercambi :  Novelle  di  Giovanni  Sercambi.  Ed.  da 
Alessandro  d'Ancona.     Scelta  ecc,  cxix.     Bologna,  1871. 

AA.—Sacchetti :   Novelle.     3  vols.     Milano,  1804. 

BB.— Zenone  da  Pistoja  :  La  Pietosa  Fonte.  Ed.  da  Zam- 
brini.    Scelta  ecc,  cxxxvii.     Bologna,  1874. 

CC— Lamenti  Storici  dei  secoli  xiv,  xv  e  xvi.  Raccolti 
di  Medin  e  Frati.     Scelta  ecc,  ccxix.     Bologna,  1887. 

DD.— I  Cantari  di  Carduino ;  giuntovi  quello  di  Tristano 
e  Lancielotto.  Pubb.  per  cura  di  Pio  Rajna.  Scelta  ecc, 
cxxxv.     Bologna,  1873. 

EE.— Leon  Battista  Alberto  :  Hecatomphila  di  Messer  L. 
B.  Alb.     Vineggia,  1534. 

FF.— Gambino  d'Arezzo  :  Versi.  Ed.  da  Gamurrini. 
Scelta  ecc,  clxiv.     Bologna,  1878. 

GG. — Pulci :  I  Fatti  di  Carlo-magno  e  de'  suoi  Paladani. 
Opere  del  Morgante.    Date  in  luce  per  Pulci.    Venetia,  1481. 

HH.— Poliziano  :  Stanze,  I'Orfeo  ed  altre  Poesie.    Milano, 

1808. 

'  IL— Burcelo :  Li  Soneti  del  Burcelo  Fiorentino.    Veniegia, 

1477. 

J  J. — Lorenzo  de'  Medici :   Poesie.     Firenze,  1859. 

KK. — Bojardo :  Orlando  Innamorato(Berni's  Rifacimento). 
4  vols.     Milano,  1806. 

LL. — Bernardo  Bellincioni :  Rime.  Ed.  da  Fanfani.  Scelta 
ecc,  CLi.     Bologna,  1876. 

MM. — Benvenuto  Cellini :  Opere.    3  vols.    Milano,  1806. 

NN. — Ariosto  :  Orlando  Furioso.    5  vols.     Milano,  1812. 

OO.— Machiavelli  :  Opere  Milano,  1804.  Vol.  i,  II 
Principe ;  Vol.  viii,  Commedie. 


6  L.    EMIL    MERGER. 

PP.— Pietro  Bembo  :  Opere.  Milano,  1808.  Vol.  i,  Gli 
Asolani. 

QQ. — Trissino  :  Opere.     Yerona,  1729. 

RE.— Leonardo  Salviati :  Opere.  Milano,  1809.  Vol.  i, 
Commedie. 

SS.— Torquato  Tasso  :  II  Goffredo.     Yinegia,  1580. 

TT. — Batecchio,  Commedia  di  Maggio.  Composto  per  il 
Pellegrino  Ingegno  del  Fumoso  della  Congrega  de'  Rozzi. 
Scelta  ecc,  cxxii.     Bologna,  1871. 

UU. — Giosne  Carducci :  Studi  Letterari.     Livoruo,  1874. 


Chapter  I. 

Irregular  forms  of  the  Possessive  Pronouns  with 

especial  reference  to  the  two-gender 

PLURALS  mia,  tua,  sua. 

1 .      Collection  of  all  irregular  uses  in  texts  examined, 

I  do  not  hold  the  opinion  that  irregularities  which  occur  in 
the  singular  had  anything  to  do  with  corresponding  ones  in  the 
plural ;  that,  for  instance,  mia  in  mia  cavallo  (supposing  such 
an  example  to  exist)  had  anything  in  common  with  mia  in  mia 
cavalli.  But  such  an  opinion  has  been  expressed.  Schuchardt, 
in  writing  of  a  kindred  topic,  says :  ^  "  Gelegentlich  der  Formen 
mia,  tua,  sua,  mochte  ich  hier  eine  Frage  vorbringen  die  aller- 
dings  mit  der  Hauptfrage  Xichts  zu  thun  hat.  Ich  finde 
liberall  nur  von  ihrer  pluralischen  Yerweudung  gesprochen ; 
ich  habe  mir  aber  vor  fast  eiuem  Yierteljahrhundert  in  Rom, 
allerdings  nicht  aus  geh5rter  Rede,  und  auch  nicht  aus  Belli, 
sondern  aus  andern  Schriften  in  romischer  Mundart  Falle  wie 
Jijo  mia,  er  norae  sua,  a  commido  sua,  lo  sposo  mia,  u.  s.  w.  auf- 
gezeichnet.  Kommt  nun  Solches  wirklich  in  der  Yolkssprache 
vor?" 

^Literaturblali,  Dec,  1891,  col.  413. 


ITALIAN    POSSESSIVE    PRONOUNS.  7 

Now,  to  ascertain  the  truth  of  the  connection,  if  any  exist, 
between  singular  and  plural  irregularities  of  the  kind  under 
discussion,  I  have  noted  all  irregular  uses  occurring  in  the 
singular  as  well  as  in  the  plural  and  treated  them  in  the  first 
part  of  this  essay,  where  I  have  attempted  explanations  of  them. 
I  then  show  that  these  irregularities  in  the  singular  cannot  be 
the  origin  of  like  irregularities  in  the  plural,  nor  those  in  the 
plural  the  origin  of  corresponding  forms  in  the  singular.  My 
plau  is  to  mention  in  chronological  sequence  all  the  texts  I  have 
consulted  giving  the  irregularities  in  the  following  order : 


First  Person, 

Masc. 

Sing. 

Fem, 

,  Sing. 

(C 

Plu. 

Plu. 

Second  Person, 

Sing. 

Sing. 

a 

Plu. 

Plu. 

Third  Person, 

Sing. 

Sing. 

a 

Plu. 

Plu. 

The  discussion  of  these  pronouns  is  reserved  until  the  full 
list  of  texts  has  been  examined  wherein  all  forms  are  omitted 
that  are  not  concerned  in  the  development  of  mia,  tua,  sua. 
(A  few  texts  will  be  mentioned  in  which  no  irregularities  occur, 
but  these  authors  are  given  to  show  the  extent  of  the  occurrences 
in  the  period  of  time  represented  by  the  texts  quoted  as  bearing 
directly  on  my  subject.)^ 

A. — In  the  few  pages  of  this  collection  which  contain  the 
poetry  of  Guittone  no  irregularities  occur. 

B. — This  author  sometimes  uses  the  atonic  forms  mi'  (masc. 
and  fem.)  and  m'  (masc). — tuo  =  tuoi:  p.  68,  U  tuo  filgli. — 
suo  =  suoi:  p.  14,  li  suo  filgli ;  p.  167,  i  suo  sembianti. 

C. — mie' =  miei :  p.  4,  occhj  mie'. — tuo  =  tuoi:  p.  229,  de' 
tuofigli. — suoi^sue:  p.  81,  In  quelle  parti,  chefurongid  suoi. 

J). — SMo'  =  suoi :  p.  1 ,  suo'  santi. 

^Nostro,  etc.,  vostro,  etc.,  are  directly  from  nostrum,  etc.,  vostrum,  etc., 
with  no  intervening  stage  in  the  development,  and  they  will  therefore  not 
be  mentioned  again. 


8  L.    EMIL    MENGER. 

E. — No  irregularities. 

F. — tu'==tuo:  p.  10,  tu'  viaggio. — tuo  =  tua:  p.  51,  la  tuo 
volontd. — tuo'  =  tuoi :  p.  6,  i  tuo'  facti  ;  p.  47,  li  vecchi  tuo'; 
p.  65,  tuo'  aversarii;  p.  66,  tuo'  nemici;  p.  73,  tuo'  consigli. — 
tuoi  =  tue:  pp.  15,  27,  le  tuoi  parole. — su'=suo:  p.  36,  su' 
abitamento. — suo'  =  suoi:  p.  19,  li  suo'  capelli. — suoi  =  sue: 
p.  76,  per  suoi  parole. 

G. — No  irregularities. 

H. — su'=sua:  p.  161,  colla  su'  arme. — suoi  =  sue:  p.  84, 
le  suoi  rughe;  p.  86,  le  suoi  intrate,  le  suoi  castella;  p.  94,  le 
suoi  genti;  p.  95,  a  suoi  spese  ;  p.  114,  di  suoi  cose, 

I. — No  irregularities. 

J. — No  irregularities. 

K. — No  irregularities. 

L. — mei  =  miei,  p.  211. — suoi  =  sue :  p.  205,  le  cose  suoi. — 
suoe  =  sue:  p.  208,  ossa  suoe. 

M. — No  irregularities. 

N. — mie' =  mia :  pp.  479,  486,  487,  j^^r  mie'  fe. — suo' ;= 
suoi:  p.  78,  suo'  haroni ;  p.  284,  suo' fratelli ;  p.  324,  suo'fgli. 

O. — mi'  =  mio :  p.  24,  mi'  parere  ;  p.  43,  mi'  core. — mie  = 
mio :  p.  6e5,  mie  spirito  (variant). — tu'  =  tuo:  pp.  14,  61,  tu' 
pensamento  ;  p.  71,  tu'  amore. — su'  =  suo:  p.  15,  su'  I'iso  ;  p. 
16,  su'  valore  ;  p.  18,  su'  viso,  etc.,  su'  thus  occurring  sixteen 
times. — suo  =  sua :  p.  4,  suo  virtu  e  suo  potenga  (variant). — 
mie' =  miei:  p.  64,  mie'  martiri;  p.  74,  mie'  foil  occhi.  One 
of  the  manuscripts  from  which  variants  are  given  (Laurent.  B. 
XV  cent.)  reads  mia  in  the  following  cases  where  the  editor  has 
adopted  miei  for  the  published  text :  pp.  20,  26,  occhi  mia ; 
pp.  35,  48,  mia  spiriti  ;  p.  64,  mia  desiri.  Several  other  vari- 
ants read  mei  in  these  instances. 

P. — mei  =  miei :  Inf  i,  23,  parenti  mei  ;  xiv,  6  ;  xxxi,  33, 
occhi  mei;  xxvi,  41,  mei  compagni;  Purg.  i,  6,  29  ;  iv,  29  ; 
X,  39 ;  XXI,  42 ;  xxiv,  34,  occhi  mei ;  i,  38,  mei  passi ;  iii, 
41,  peccati  mei;  xvii,  4,  mei  compassi;  xxxi,  5, /rati  mei; 
XXVII,  23,  mei  saggi;  xxviii,  20,  prieghi  mei;  Par.  xvil,  37, 
mei  carmi  ;  xxiii,  27  ;  xxvi,  38  ;  xxvii,  4 ;  xxx,  25  ;  xxxi, 


ITALIAN   POSSESSIVE   PRONOUNS.  V 

47,  occhi  mei. — mie  =  miei :  Inf.  x,  28,  mie  popoli  ;  xv,  32, 
orecchie  mie;  XViil,  14;  xxv,  49,  occhi  mie;  xxvi,  41,  mie 
compagni;  xxxiii,  13,  mie  jigliuoli ;  Pnrg.  i,  6  ;  Viii,  29  ;  X, 
39,  occhi  mie;  i,  38 ;  xxv,  42,  mie  passi;  xi,  21,  mie  maggiori; 
xiii,  38,  mie  anni ;  xxiv,  48,  mie  dottori  ;  xxx,  47,  prieghi 
mie;  xxxi,  8,  mie  desiri;  Par.  xiv,  26,  28,  occhi  mie;  IV,  3, 
mie  dubi;  xvi,  10,  mie  blandimenti;  xvi,  15,  mie  maggiori; 
XVII,  37,  mie  carmi;  xxiv,  20,  mie  concepti ;  xvii,  29,  mie 
pief^;. — toi  =  tuoi:   Inf.  xx,  34,  toi  ragionamenti ;  xxii,  11, 
^oi  concepti. — tui  =  tuoi:  Inf.  x,  14,  maggior  tui. — tuo  =  tuoi: 
Inf.  V,  39,  iuo  marriii ;  xxvi,  2,  ^ito  citadini ;  xxx,  40,  /wo 
fratelli;  Pnrg.  i,  28,  /mo  re^wi;  VI,  37,  tuo  gentili ;  xi,  47,  iuo 
vicini;  xiii,  7,  tuo  raggi ;  Par.  xi,  7,  tuo  pensieri;  xxi,  6, 
occ/ii  tuo  ;  xxviii,  20,  tuo  diti. — tuoe  =  tue :  Inf.  ii,  46,  parole 
tuoe. — soi=^suoi:  Inf.  I,  19,  soi  pensier ;  ix,  38,  soi  termini; 
XI,  14,  soi  beni;  Xix,  11,  soi  conforti;  xix,  12,  soi  torti;  xxiii, 
18,  soi  pie;  xxix,  14,  soi  conversi ;  Pnrg.  iv,  41,  aiti  soi;  Vii, 
44  ;  xxvii,  42  ;  XXI,  37,  occhi  soi;  Par.  xv,  12,  occhi  soi. — 
sui  =  suoi:  Inf.  ii,  26,  cerchi  sui ;  III,  21,  inimici  sui;  IX, 
corpi  sui. — suo  =  suoi:   Inf.  IV,  20,  suo  nati ;  xix,  11,  swo 
conforti;  Purg.  i,  12,  suo  capelli ;  ill,  6;  VI,  19,  suo  raggi; 
XXI,  12,  suo  pie;  xxvii,  18,  occhi  suo;  xxvii,  36,  suo  belli 
occhi;  XXIX,  4,  suo  passi ;  Par.  xvi,  20,  suo  jigli ;  xx,  3,  suo 
died-;  xxiii,  1,  sxio  nati;  xxxi,  23,  suo  meriti ;  xxxii,  2, 
suo  piedi. — suoe  =  sue :  Inf  xiii,  34,  suoe  spalle. — suo  =  sv,e : 
Inf.  XIV,  12,  suo  schieri;  Purg.  IV,  7,  suo  spine;  IX,  13,  suo 
braccia;  xxviii,  9,  suo  picciol  onde  ;  Par.  vii,  37,  le  suo  vie. 
A  variant  to  Purg.  ix,  13,  reads  le  sua  braccia. 

Q. — mie' =  miei:  i,  162,  mie'  affanni ;  il,  196,  mie'  ingegni; 
mie'  arti. — tuo'  =  tuoi:  ii,  12,  tuo'  ingegni;  ii,  144,  tuo'  piedi. — 
mo'=moi:  i,  35,  suo'  laudi ;  ii,  176,  suo'  argomenti. 

R. — miei  =  mie :  p.  2,  alle  miei  mani. 

S. — tuo  =  tua:  p.  201,  la  tuo  derrata. — tuo' ^ tuoi:  p.  185, 
tuo'  sccdzi. — m'  =  mo:  p.  174,  su'  or. — su'=sua:  p.  1,  sit' 
arte, — sua  =  suoi :  p.  42,  sua  fatti  (variant). 

T. — mei  =  miei  occurs  twenty  times. 


Of 


eap       V.  *v  0  .<■/ 


10  L.    EMIL    MENGEE. 

U. — mio  =  mia :  pp.  29,  30,  meta  mio  (on  both  pages  occurs 
also  metd,  mia). — 7nlee  =  mie :  p.  25,  nipote  miee. — suoe  =  sue : 
p.  63,  suoe  spesie. 

V. — Fiammetta.  mei  =  miei:  p.  23,  mei  conforti ;  p.  138, 
mei  danni. — mie  =  miei:  p.  136,  mie  desidei'i. — tuo  =  tuoi:  p. 
32,  tuo  sudditi. — suo  =  suoi :  p.  43,  suo  homeri. 

Ameto.  mie:=:miei:  p.  8,  mie  aspetti. — mei:=miei:  p.  31, 
desidernj  mei. — tuo  =  tuoi :  p.  24,  tuo  versi. — suo  =  suoi:  p.  42, 
suofrutti;  p.  78,  suo  compagni. — sua=sue:  p.  56,  lesua  coma; 
p.  57,  le  labra  .sua. 

Decamerone.  mei  ==  miei  occurs  eleven  times. — mid  =  mie : 
Lbj  3,^  le  miei  novelle. — tuoe  =  tue :  Yiiij,  tuoe  node,  tuoe  pro- 
messioni. — suo  =  suoi :  Cb,  suo  discendenti  ;  H,  suo  qfficiali. — 
suoe  =  sue :  Zb,  suoe  7'obe. 

W. — No  irregularities. 

X. — mie  =  mia :  giiij  8,  la  mie  speranza ;  qiiij  2,  la  mie 
guida^ — mi ^=  mia:  hiiij,  mi  voglia. — mie  =  miei  occurs  seven 
times  (cf.  aiiij  6,  bij,  eij,  fij,  giiij,  kij,  Oiiij  8),  and  mei  =  mid 
twenty-two  times  (cf.  Aiiij  7,  Bj,  ciiij,  diiij  9,  etc.). — miei  = 
mie:  eiiij  2,  le  miei  confine;  iiiij  2;  kj,  le  miei  giente;  kij,  li- 
magine  miei;  Eiiij,  siiij  4,  le  parole  miei;  t,  le  miei  guide. — 
me  =  miei :  eiij,  i  me  danni. — me  =  mie :  diiij  6,  le  me  ziglia. — 
tuo  =  tuoi :  C,  tuo  brevi  py^ologi. — sue  =  suo :  fij,  al  sue  desio; 
Oiiij  8,  el  sue  nome;  ciij,  el  sue  grembo. — sua  =  suo :  giiij,  per 
sua  dardano;  Dj,  el  maschio  sua. — suo  =  suoi  occurs  twenty- 
four  times  (cf.  diiij,  eiij,  fiiij,  hj,  etc.). — sue^=sua:  diiij  2,  la 
sue  spoglia;  hiiij  6,  la  sue  lucie;  &iiij  2,  la  sue  virtu. — suo  = 
sua:  giiij  6,  ogne  suo  virtu,;  hiij,  la  suo  matricola;  miij  2,  ogni 
suo  empresa;  piiij  2,  suo  arte;  piiij  8,  suo  posta;  uiiij  3,  suo 
giorna;  9j,  suo  plncerna;  Jtiiij  7,  la  suo  tromba. — suoi  =  sue: 
siiij  3,  le  suoi  schiumi;  tij,  le  suoi  confini;  z,  suoi  pendice. — 
swo  =  sue:  diiij  6,  le  suo  porti;  tiiij,  le  bataglie  suo;  fiiij,  le  suo 

^  In  looking  for  this  reference  it  will  be  necessary  to  count  three  pages 
forward  from  the  folio  lettered  Lbj.  This  system  is  observed  in  giving 
references  to  all  editions  divided  according  to  folios. 


ITALIAN    POSSESSIVE   PRONOUNS.  11 

sorte;  niiij,  le  mo  arte;  piiij  7,  qiiij,  le  suo  cose;  qj,  le  suo  ripe; 
siij,  le  suo  parole;  tiiij  6,  le  suo  rene;  Oiiij  6,  le  sorelle  suo. 

Y. — mie'  =  miei :  p.  35,  passi  mie';  p.  42,  i  mie'  giorni. — 
tuo  =  tuoi :  p.  44,  iito'  paesi. 

Z. — miei  =  mie:  p.  109,  de'  77^^■e^  ro6e;  p.  240,  le  miei  bri- 
gate. — iuoi  =  tue:  p.  240,  (JelV  opere  tuoi;  p.  98,  tuoi  gioie. — 
suoi  =  8ue:  p.  11,  suoi  gare;  p.  169,  le  suoi  ingiurie;  p.  170, 
le  suoi  infinite  (cose);  p.  84,  le  suoi  figliuole;  p.  176,  le  suoi 
scfiitture;  p.  228,  le  suoi  terre;  p.  260,  le  suoi  genti;  p.  260,  le 
suoi  brigate. 

AA. — mie' =  mid:  II,  13,  m*V  d*;  ii,  211,  m?V  signori. — 
mia  =  miei:  i,  139,  U  fatti  mia;  ii,  248,  certi  mia  fatti;  iii, 
179,  a  mia  parenti. — mia  =  mie:  ii,  77,  le  mia  forme;  ill,  6, 
mia  dipinture;  iii,  217,  le  carni  mia. — tuo' =  tuoi:  ii,  122, 
con  tuo'  strufinacci. — suo' =  suoi:  i,  76,  suo'  parenti;  i,  77, 
suo'  vieini;  i,  198,  suo'  dazj ;  ill,  185,  suo'  pari;  iii,  336, 
suo'  casi. — sua  =  suoi:  i,  6,  sudditi  sua;  i,  124,  sita  cavalli; 
I,  200,  sita  /a^^i;  iii,  251,  sua  panni. — sua  =^ sue:  ii,  98,  le 
came  sua. 

BB. — mie'  =  miei :  p.  55,  e'  mie'  chiovi. — tuo  =  tua :  p.  6, 
la  tuo  moneta;  p.  39,  tuo  misericordia ;  p.  71,  la,  tuo  gran  cor- 
tesia;  p.  60,  la  tuo  mente;  p.  81,  la  tuo  beatrice. — tuo  =  tuoi: 
p.  59,  tuo  disii. — suo' =  suoi:  p.  35,  di  suo'  guai;  p.  70,  ne 
suo' versi. — su'=sua:  p.  16,  la  su'  arte. — suo  =  sua:  p.  4, 
suo  ira;  p.  53,  suo  possa;  pp.  45,  85,  88,  la  suo  vita;  p.  79, 
la  suo  ghirlanda;  p.  68,  la  suo  gran  chiarezza;  p.  71,  la  suo 
vista;  p.  80,  la  suo  luce;  p.  8Q,  suopartenza;  p.  89,  suo  volonta; 
p.  89,  suo  bocca;  p.  90,  suo  bilancia. — suo  =  sue:  p.  83,  suo 
cose. 

CC. — tuo' =  tuoi:  p.  266,  ^i  tuo'  dohi  occhi. 

DD. — mie  =  mio:  pp.  5,  12,  mie  padre. — mie  =  mia:  pp. 
14,  26,  mie  madre ;  p.  17,  mie  sorella ;  p.  49,  mze  vita;  p.  52, 
mie  leanza;  p.  59,  mie  spada. — tuo  =  tua:  p.  13,  iwo  nazione, 
tuo  madre,  tuo  condizione ;  p.  18,  tuo  sorella;  pp.  32,  58,  tuo 
bontade;  p.  52,  tuo  contrada;  p.  54,  tuo  presenza;  pp.  58,  62, 
<wo  wto  ;  p.  61,  tuo  posanza. — suo  =  sua:  p.  4,  suo  gente;  p. 


12  L,.    EMIL    MENGER. 

12,  suo  baronia,  suo  madre;  p.  17,  suo  arte;  p.  20,  suo  corte; 
p.  25,  SMo  virtue ;  p.  35,  smo  gara;  p.  43,  s^to  ciera  ;  p.  51,  smo 
parte;  p.  54,  smo  via;  p.  61,  smo  spada. — suo  =  suoi:  p.  13, 
SMO  fratei;  p.  14,  swo  baroni. — suo  =  sue:  p.  9,  swo  gioie;  p. 
17,  SMo  voglie. 

EE. — mei  =  miei:  p.  2,  me*  amori;  p.  3,  me*  errori;  p.  15, 
mei  sospiri;  p.  16,  mei  pensieri;  p.  21,  rnei  ma?i;  p.  27,  amici 
met. — ^wo  =  ^Moi .-  p.  6,  ^wo  c?owi. — suo  =  suoi :  p.  26,  suo  erucd. 

FF. — mV  =  mio:  p.  173,  «^  mi'  ingegno. — mie' =  miei :  p. 
2,  mie'  pensieri;  p.  20,  miV  mirti;  p.  89,  mzV  toscani;  p.  180, 
m«e'  martii'i. — su'  =  sua:  p.  29,  /a  su'  razza. — suo' =  suoi:  p. 
68,  srto'  ^es^t. — sm'  =  sue :  p.  20,  iwf^e  su'  piaghe. 

GG. — mei  =  miei:  fo.  e  4,  m^r  compagni. — mie  =  miei:  fo. 
a  3,  mie  fratelli. — tuo  =  ^wa ;  fo.  i  3,  ogni  cosa  sia  tiio  ;  fo.  a  4, 
iwo  vilania. — i^wa  =  tue :  fo.  d,  alle  tua  mura. — suo  =  sua :  fo. 
a  4,  suo  coda. — suo ^ suoi:  fo.  b  1,  suo  fratei:  fo.  e  2,  suo 
baroni ;  fo,  e  4,  swo  tradimenti ;  fo.  i  3,  swo  suggedi. 

HH. — mie'  =  miei :  i,  6,  raie'  versi. 

II. — mie  =  mio :  fo.  eq  6,  un  mie  sonetto.—mei  =  miei :  fo. 
cq,  mei  occhi;  spiriti  mei ;  fo.  tliij,  signor  mei;  fo.  dq  2,  tutti  i 
mei;  fo.  g,  parenti  mei;  fo.  r,  occhi  mei;  fo.  gq  9,  mei  amid. — 
mie  =  miei :  fo.  hq  5,  mie  detti. — mia  =  mie :  fo.  bq  6,  le  parole 
mia. — tuo  =  tuoi :  fo.  gz,  tuo  belli  occhi. — tua  =  tuoi :  fo.  eq  8, 
tua  sciochi. — suo  =■  suoi :  fo.  c,  suo  Jior  ;  suo  gred. — sua  = 
suoi:  fo.  dq,  sua panni. — sua ^ sue:  fo.  fq  6,  le  sua  alia. 

J  J. — mie' =  miei:  p.  241,  mie'  giovenchi. — mei  ^:^  miei:  p. 
133,  i pensier  md. — mia  =  miei:  p.  118,  a'  pianti  mia;  p.  70, 
occhi  stanchi  mia;  p.  244,  de'  fatti  mia. — mia::=mie:  p.  372, 
le  membra  mia. — tuo'  =:  tuoi:  p.  239,  tuo' pagliai ;  p.  249,  tuo' 
begli  occhi;  p.  361,  tuo' prieghi;  p.  377,  tuo' fratelli. — tua  = 
tuoi:  p.  255,  i  colpi  tua. — tua  :^  tue:  p.  241,  le  tua  bestie. — 
suo'  =  suoi:  p.  302,  suo'  anni. — suo'  =  sue:  p.  292,  suo'foglie. 

KK. — mia  =  mio  :  xii,  66,  alcun  tempo  mia  (rhyme). — 
mei  :=  miei:  liii,  18,  mei  baroni. — tu'  ^=tuoi:  xxvii,  37,  de' 
tu'  occhi. 

LL. — mia  =  mie :  p.  38,  ossa  mia. 


ITALIAN   POSSESSIVE   PRONOUNS.  13 

MM.—inia  =  miei:  i,  12,  203,  222,  426  ;  ii,  127,  159,  362, 
i  casi  mia;  i,  39,  60,  60,  72,  349,  354,  363 ;  ii,  198,  295,  296, 
300,  413,  308,  379,  i  mia  danari;  i,  43,  44,  46  ;  ii,  71,  awer- 
sarj  mia;  i,  54  ;  ii,  202,  mia  pari;  i,  54  ;  ii,  195,  303,  317, 
mia  disegni;  i,  60;  ii,  295,  mia  scudi;  i,  62,  mia  affari ;  i, 
62;  II,  12,  491,  mia  jigliuoli;  i,  83,  atudj  mia;  ii,  380,  mia 
studj ;  II,  478,  mia  danni;  i,  393;  ii,  299,  mia  dispiaceri;  i, 
327,  392,  miaferruzzi;  i,  254,  293,  385,  nemici  mia;  i,  204, 
236,  383,  396  ;  ii,  108,  167,  191,  24S,  fatii  mia;  i,  434,  438  ; 
II,  307,  mia  occhi;  i,  422;  ii,  110,  mia  libri;  i,  422,  mia 
uomini;  i,  164,  232,  236,  261,  262,  263,  386,  mia  nemici;  i, 
384,  384,  385,  415  ;  ii,  56,  113,  400,  mia  servitori  ;  i,  99,  mia 
aceiari;  i,  115,  252,  253,  288,  300,  307,  310,  312,  317,  353, 
363,  400,  410,  413  ;  ii,  132,  233,  mia  amid;  i,  132,  mia  sojji- 
oni;  I,  190,  mia  afanni;  i,  194,  460;  ii,  31,  68,  100,  170, 
195,  279,  292,  349,  mia  lavoranti;  i,  287,  mia  ferri;  i,  295, 
mia  scoppietti;  i,  295,  mia  modelletti ;  i,  310,  mia  piedi ;  i, 
315,  mia  stivali;  i,  317  ;  ii,  147,  mia  conoscenii;  i,  339,  mia 
Italiam;  i,  347,  350,  351,  358,  384 ;  ii,  20,  22,  23,  27,  56,  71, 
112, 116,  120,  mia  giovani  ;  i,  361,  mia  cavalli ;  i,  369,  signori 
mia  ;  ii,  291,  signori  mia  ;  ii,  97,  274,  mia  travagli  ;  ii,  114, 
occhi  mia;  ii,  124,  mia  fatti ;  ii,  154,  356,  mia  salarj ;  ii, 
162,  mia  spiriti ;  ii,  178,  mia  compagni ;  ii,  181,  mia  ribaldi; 
II,  193,  234,  mia  bisogni;  ii,  199,  mia  pensieri ;  ii,  202,  ^an 
mia;  ii,  211,  mia  allevati ;  ii,  282,  mia  panni ;  ii,  285,  mia 
piatti ;  II,  286,  mia  conati  ;  ii,  319,  320,  mia  bastoni ;  ii,  367, 
mia  anni;  ii,  379,  mia  ajati;  ii,  452,  mia  debitori;  mia  eredi. 

mia  =  mie  :  i,  25,  mia  belle-  ;  mia  sorelle  ;  i,  338,  cose  mia  ; 

I,  390,  7ma  lenzuole  ;  ii,  73,  7nia  teste  ;  ii,  74,  mia  forme ;  ii. 
125,  mia  maiii ;  ii,  274,  mia  nepotine. 

tua  z=  tuoi :  i,  24,  Jigliuoli  tua  ;  i,  29,  tua  disegni ;  i,  60,  tua 
scudi;  I,  21 S,  fatti  tua;  i,  251,  casi  tua;  ii,  481,  tua  bisogni; 

II,  482,  tua  piaceri. 

sua  =  suoi :  i,  63,  sua  atti  ;  i,  68,  394,  403,  404,  sua  gen- 
tiluomini ;  i,  97,  253,  sua  amid;  i,  112,  stia  capitani ;  i,  156, 
stia  afanni ;  sua  scritti ;  i,  271,  casi  sua;  i,  284,  sua  ferri; 


A^    OP   TK- 


.•5=.^^ 


TTHIVE 


14  L.    EMIL   MENGER. 

I,  305,  bisogni  sua;  i,  173,  220  ;  ii,  234,  sua  danari ;  i,  217, 
sua  birreschi ;  i,  220  ;  ii,  295,  sua  scudi;  i,  331,  sua  domestici; 
I,  302,  ornamenti  sua  ;  i,  368,  sua  caporali  ;  i,  370,  sua  regni  ; 
I,  379,  vizj  sua ;  i,  388,  medid  sua;  i,  388,  403,  439,  448,  sua 
servitmi;  i,S90,  tuttii  sv,a^;  i,  412,  amid  suu  ;  i,  452,  segreti 
sua;  II,  377,  suu  piedi ;  n,  394,  sua  lavoranti;  ii,  442,  sua 
eredi ;  ii,  12,  461,  sua  jigliuuli ;  n,  44,  377,  ma  cortigiani; 
u,  57,  sua  ribaldj  ;  ii,  303,  sua  segretarj  ;  ii,  117, 117,  nemid 
sua;  II,  169,  tempi  sua;  ii,  202,  sua  pari ;  ii,  445,  sua  voca- 
boli  ;  II,  486,  sua  confini ;  ill,  238,  sua  squadratori ;  iii,  248, 
248,  sua  modelli. 

sua ^ sue:  i,  256,  cose  sua;  ii,  30,  lettere  sua;  ii,  109, /a- 
cende  sua. 

NN. — mie'  =  miei:  v,  27,  Ii  mie'  uguali ;  xxxviii,  84,  ?ntV 
jigli. — toi  =  tuoi:  XXXV,  43,  toiprigion  (variant). — tuo'=tuoi: 
XXIII,  73,  tuo'  vestigi;  xxxviii,  63,  tuo'  infiniti.  (A  variant 
reads  here  tui.) — suo'  =  suoi :  xxv,  49,  suo'  begli  occhi  (vari- 
ant) ;  XXV,  5,  .SMo'  amid  (var.) ;  xxxix,  33,  suo'  amid  (as  a 
variant  to  this  appears  sua);  xxxi,  82,  suo'  amid;  xli,  49, 
suo'  amori. — sui^suoi:  TV,  occhi  sui;  xvii,  114,  cavalieri 
sui;  xviii,  153,  tutti  i  sui-;  xxni,  22;  xxxvii,  ^6,frateUi 
sui;  XXXI,  35,  cugin  sui;  xxxiii,  18,  servitori  sui;  xxxiv, 
S2,fatti  sui;  xliv,  59,  affanni  sui;  XLV,  44,  d^  sui-. — soi  z= 
suoi :  XXXIII,  1 24,  soi  baroni. 

OO. — mie'  =  miei :  p.  276,  mie'  affanni. — mia  =  mid :  p. 
257,  mia  desiderj  ;  p.  257,  mia  martiri;  p.  S96,  pensier  mia. — 
tuo'  =  tuoi :  p.  394,  tuo'  accenti. — tua  =  tuoi :  p.  260,  tua  con- 
forti;  p.  393,  tua  lumi. 

PP,  QQ,  RR,  no  irregularities. 

SS. — tuo  =  tua :  p.  8,  guerra  tuo. — suo'  =  suoi :  p.  4,  suo' 
fanti;  p.  28,  suo'  mali ;  p.  43,  suo'  error ;  p.  52,  suo'  cad. — 
su'  =  suoi:  p.  49,  de'  su'  qffici. 

TT. — mie  =  mio:  p.  63,  mie  male;  p.  73,  un  mie  pari;  p. 
78,  el  mie  martire;  p.  104,  mie  padron ;  mie  difetto ;  p.  105, 
mie  canto. — mie z=  mia:  pp.  56,  64,  75,  85,  la  mie  mnnza ;  p. 
62,  mie  vita ;  p.  86,  mie  dama ;  p.  88,  mie  persona ;  p.  104, 


ITALIAN   POSSESSIVE   PRONOUNS.  15 

mie  moglie;  mie  colpa. — tuo  =  tua :  p.  58,  tuo  hella  manza ;  p. 
85,  la  tuo  speranza  ;  p.  87,  tuo  voglia  ;  pp.  92,  98,  tuo  valentia  ; 
p.  96,  tuo  moglie. — tuo  =  tue :  p.  87,  le  tuo  spalle. — suo  =  sua : 
p.  63,  la  suo  vita. — suo'  =  suoi :  p.  88,  e'  suo'  fatti. — suo'  = 
sue:  p.  76,  le  suo'  mercanzie. 

UU. — mie'  =  mio:  p.  415,  un  mie'  sparvier' ;  p.  427,  'I  mie' 
sparvero  ;  p.  428,  'I  mie'  diffetto  ;  p.  437, '/  mie'  amove. — mie'  = 
mia :  p.  408,  mie'  compagna  ;  p.  437,  mie'  donna. — tuo'  =.  tua : 
p.  435,  di  tuo'  biltate. — suo'  =  sua :  p.  428,  suo'  tana  ;  p.  436, 
sua' pena. — suo' =z  sue:  p.  425,  disuo' penne;  p.  442,  lesuo'  ali. 

Resume. 

The  following  Table  gives  a  resume  of  the  examples  of 
irregularities  noted  above.  The  capital  letters  refer  to  the 
authors,  the  numerals  to  the  number  of  times  a  given  irregu- 
larity occurs  in  the  author  mentioned.  Where  forms  were 
printed  with  the  apostrophe,  these  are  placed  first ;  the  corres- 
ponding form  without  the  apostrophe  to  the  right  of  that 
with  it. 

mi' =  mio,  B,  02,  FFl. 


mi' —  mia,  B. 

mi  —  mia,  X2. 
me  —  miei,  XI. 
me  —  mie,  XI. 

tu'—  tuo,  Fl,  02. 

<w'=—  tuoi,  KKl. 

sw' —  suo,  B,  Fl,  < 

02, 

SI 

su' —  sua,  HI,  SI, 

,  BBl, 

FFl. 

su' —  suoi,  SSI. 

su'—  sue,  FFl. 

mie'=  mio,  UU4.  mie  =  mio,  Ol,  DD2,  III,  TT6. 

mie'=  mia,  N3,  UU2.  mie  =  mia,  X2,  DD6,  TT6. 

mio  =  mia,  U2. 
tuo'=  tua,  UUl.  tuo  =  tua,  Fl,  SI,  BBS, 


16  L.    EMIL    MENGEB. 

DDll,  GG2,  SSI,  TT6. 
sue  =  suo,  X3. 
swa  =^  suo,  X2. 
sue  =  sua,  X3. 
suo'=sua,  UU2.     .mo  =:  swa,  02,  X8,  BBll,  DDll,  GGl, 
TTl. 


mei  =  m{ei,  Bl,  LI,  P22,  T20,  V14,  X22,  EE6,  GGl,  118, 

JJl,  KKl. 
mie'=miei,  CI,  02,  Q3,  Y2,  AA2,  BBl,  FF4,  HHl,  JJl, 

NN2,  OOl. 
mie  =  miei,  P25,  V2,  X7,  GGl,  III. 
tuo'=tuoi,  F5,  PIO,  Q2,  SI,  Y2,  AAl,  CCl,  FFl,  JJ4, 

NN2,  OOl,  TTl. 
tuo  =  tuoi,  Bl,  CI,  V2,  XI,  BBl,  EEl,  III. 
mo'=suoi,  Dl,  Fl,  N3,  P14,  Q2,  AA5,  BB2,  FFi,  JJl, 

NN2,  SS4,  TTl. 
mo  =  suoi,  B2,  V5,  X24,  DD2,  EEl,  GG4,  112. 


miei^=mie,  R1,V1,  X5,  Z2. 

tuoi  r=  tue,  Fl,  Z2. 

suoi  =  sue,  CI,  Fl,  116,  LI,  X3,  Z8. 

miee^mie,  JJl. 

tuoe  =  tue,  PI,  V2. 

suoe=r.sue,  Ll,  PI,  Ul,  VI. 

tuo  =  tue,  FFl. 

mo'=  sue,  JJl,  TTl,  UU2. 

mo  =  sue,  P6,  X9,  BBl,  DD2. 


mia  =  miei,  03,  AA3,  JJ3,  MM157,  003. 
mia  =  mie,  AA3,  III,  JJl,  LLl,  MM8. 
tua  =  tuoi.  III,  JJl,  MM7,  002. 
tua^^  tue,  GGl,  JJl. 
sua  =  moi,  SI,  AA4,  III,  MM51,  NNl. 
ma  =  me,  P1,V2,  AAl,  III,  MM3. 


ITALIAN   POSSESSIVE   PRONOUNS.  17 

2.     Irregularities  in  the  Singular  discussed. 

If  we  view  the  irregularities  occurring  in  the  singular  as  a 
whole,  three  general  reasons  for  thera  suggest  themselves. 

First,  it  is  to  be  remarked  that  in  the  greater  number  of 
cases  the  masculine  is  used  for  the  feminine  form  (cf.  Table, 
suo  =  sua,  tuo  =  tua,  etc.).  In  the  plural  the  feminine  is 
never  used  for  the  masculine.  When  the  indefinite  tuo\  suo', 
as  used  for- masculine  and  feminine  alike  (cf.  Table,  tuo  =  tuoi 
and  tue,  suo  =  suoi  and  sue),  take  on  again  the  full  forms  t^ioi 
and  suoi  for  the  masculine,  not  only  are  the  regular  tue,  sue 
not  adopted  for  the  feminine  in  all  instances,  but  tuoi,  suoi  are 
used  for  feminine  as  well  as  masculine  (the  same  remark  applies 
to  niiei;  cf.  Table,  mzei  =  m/e;  tuoi  =  tue;  suoi  =  sue).  We 
may  say  then  that  mio,  tuo,  suo,  are  used  for  mia,  tua,  sua  (and 
this  use  includes  the  largest  part  of  the  irregularities)  and  thus 
follow  this  seeming  general  tendency  to  adopt  masculine  for 
feminine. 

Secondly,  the  irregularities  may  have  arisen  from  a  desire 
(on  the  part  of  the  writer  or  speaker)  to  indicate  the  sex  of  the 
possessor  by  using  the  masculine  or  feminine  pronoun  with 
regard  to  the  possessor  and  not  to  the  gender  of  the  object 
possessed.  In  DD,  where  the  Aasculine  form  is  so  often  used 
for  both  genders,  the  desire  to  differentiate  sex  may  well  be  the 
reason  for  the  masculine  form,  since,  with  few  exceptions,  the 
irregular  possessives  refer  to  characters  of  the  male  gender 
(Carduino,  Tristano  or  Lanciel lotto),  there  being  few  other  per- 
sonages mentioned.  Thus,  in  speaking  of  Carduino's  mother, 
the  writer  uses  (p.  12)  suo  madre,  corresponding  to  English 
"  his  mother,"  whereas,  if  he  had  referred  to  the  heroine's 
mother,  he  would  doubtless  have  said  sua  madre,  "her  mother." 
— Or,  again,  such  a  use  might  have  arisen  in  constructions  such 
as  are  found  in  H,  cf.  p.  114,  di  suoi  cose,  o  danari  o  panni, 
where  the  objects  implied  in  the  cose  {panni  and  danari)  are 
both  masculine  and  the  speaker  probably  in  anticipation  of 
their  gender  used  the  masculine  suoi. — Again,  it  would  be 
2 


18  L.    EMIL    MENGER. 

natural  for  irregularities  to  arise  where  there  was  a  habit  oi 
separating  the  pronoun  from  its  noun,  as  may  be  noted  in  S : 
p.  65,  guai  a  chi  nel  tormento,  sua  non  puo  spander  voce ;  p. 
82,  molto  ho  oeixato  e  suo  7ion  irovo  nome ;  p.  83,  et  tua  taci 
sentenza. 

Thirdly,  an  explanation  that  might  apply  to  all  irregularities 
of  the  kind  under  discussion  would  be  to  take  as  points  of  de- 
parture the  remnants  of  the  atonic  forms  mi',  tu\  su\  which  are 
sometimes  found  in  literary  productions  and  are  constantly  used 
by  the  people.  We  may  assume  that  when  a  consciousness  was 
aroused  of  the  incorrectness  of  certain  pronominal  uses  teruiina- 
tional  vowels  were  added  (to  mi'',  tu\  su'),  but  the  speaker,  being 
unaccustomed  to  proper  grammatical  forms,  added  these  vowels 
at  random,  and  hence  the  confusion  of  genders. 

Any  one  of  these  suggestions  might  explain,  in  a  general  way, 
the  beginnings  of  abnormal  forms,  and  once  introduced,  their 
use  would  naturally  be  extended ;  but  I  think  the  following 
statement  will  account  for  the  origin  of  the  peculiarities  under 
discussion  in  a  more  satisfactory  way. 

mie  =  mio  and  mia  ;  mio  =  mia. 

In  N,  where  the  examples  of  per  mie'  fe  were  noted,  the 
editor  (Parodi)  says  the  mie'  is  an  abbreviation  of  the  ancient 
*miea.  Where  mie'  is  used  as  masculine,  then,  it  was  evidently 
in  the  mind  of  the  writer  that  it  was  an  abbreviation  of  *mieo. 
The  scholar  Carducci  had  such  a  form  in  mind  when  he  wrote 
the  form  with  the  apostrophe  (cf.  UU).  In  a  discussion  of 
these  and  other  shortened  forms  one  must  suppose  that  the 
original  was  with  an  apostrophe ;  to  think  otherwise  would  be 
to  become  involved  in  inextricable  difficulties.  Thus  mie'  as 
an  abbreviation  of  mie-o  and  mie-a  would  naturally  be  used 
for  masculine  and  feminine  alike.^ — An  explanation  of  mio 
(==  mia)  follows  here,  for  just  as  the  abbreviated  form  mie'  was 
used  for  both  genders,  so,  when  the  regular  mio  was  again 

1  Cf.  p.  15. 


ITALIAN   POSSESSIVE   PRONOUNS.  19 

adopted  for  the  masculine,  the  difference  in  termination  was 
sometimes  overlooked,  and  we  find  it  used  occasionally  for  the 
feminine  also.  A  speaker  who  had  been  accustomed  to  using 
miV  as  an  indifferent  form  for  masculine  or  feminine  would 
be  likely  to  use  the  regular  mio  and  mia  indifferently  also ;  we 
find  mia  used  for  mio  only  once,  however,  and  then  for  the 
sake  of  the  rhyme  (cf.  KK). 

tuo  =  tua;  suo  =  sua. 

I  think  this  use  arose  from  a  confusion  with  tuo',  suo\  as 
representing  tuoi,  tue, — suoi,  sue.  We  find  these  forms,  tuo', 
sua'  (written  as  often  without  as  with  the  apostrophe)  used 
promiscuously  for  masculine  and  feminine  (tuoe  and  suoe, 
written  in  full,  occur  in  L,  P,  U  and  V, — cf.  Table).  It  is 
easily  conceivable  how  such  a  form,  used  thus  for  three  parts 
of  the  possessive, — tiie  masculine  singular  and  masculine  and 
feminine  plural, — should  have  been  adopted  for  the  fourth 
(the  feminine  singular).  I  am  convinced  that  this  supposi- 
tion represents  a  highly  probable  mode  of  development  of 
these  abnormal  constructions,  for  we  find  that  in  the  same 
texts  in  which  tuo,  suo  are  used  for  one  form  of  the  possessive 
(the  feminine  singular,  for  example)  they  (tuo,  suo)  are  also 
used  for  the  other  two  forms,  the  masculine  and  feminine 
plural  [cf.  Table.  In  BB,  DD,  TT,  X,  for  example,  suo  is 
thus  equivalent  to  suoi,  sue  (under  the  form  siioe)  and  sua'\. 

sue  =  suo  and  sua  ;  sua  =  suo. 

These  three  irregularities  are  found  in  one  and  the  same 
text  (X) — a  fact  which  indicates  that  they  were  peculiar  to 
this  author  rather  than  in  general  use  (contrary  to  the  pecu- 
liar uses  just  noted  which  seem  to  have  been  quite  widely 
diffused  ;  cf.  Table).  This  writer  also  used  mie  thus  indis- 
criminately  for  masculine  and  feminine,  and  may  have  carried 
its  last  vowel,  -e,  to  sue,  or,  since  we  have  suo  used  for  sua 
and  sue,  we  expect  an  interchange  in  the  opposite  direction, 


20  L.    EMIL   MENGER. 

where  sue  is  used  for  sua  and  suo. — I  think  any  idea  tliat  this 
suo  was  a  remnant  of  suoe  was  lost  with  the  majority  of  writers, 
for  we  find  it  in  many  texts  written  without  an  apostrophe 
before  masculine  and  feminine  nouns  alike.  Thus  used,  there 
was  evidently  no  consciousness  of  any  correctness  of  termina- 
tion, and  one  is  not  surprised  to  find  it  employed  for  all  forms, 
Dor,  on  the  contrary,  to  see  other  forms  substituted  for  it. 

I  do  not  claim  that  these  suggestions  are  more  than  possi- 
ble explanations  of  the  beginnings  of  the  irregular  forms  under 
discussion.  No  one  would  suppose  that  in  the  mind  of  the 
average  speaker  there  was  an  idea  of  the  existence  of  any  ety- 
mological ground  for  the  irregularity  he  was  employing. 

I  have  offered  no  phonetical  explanation  because  I  cannot 
conceive  of  one.  The  fact  that  masculine  singular  forms  pre- 
dominate does  not  necessarily  indicate  a  disposition  toward  the 
use  of  -o  terminations ;  for,  to  prove  such  a  tendency  in  the 
language  would  involve  a  demonstration  that  parts  of  speech 
other  than  the  singular  possessive  pronouns  terminated  thus 
irregularly  in  -o,  and  I  do  not  think  that  such  a  phenomenon 
can  be  proved  for  the  Italian,  In  addition  to  this,  although 
the  masculine  form  is  used  in  the  majority  of  eases  yet  other 
forms  occur  too  often  to  admit  of  the  possibility  of  such  an 
explanation  even  for  the  possessive  pronouns. 

a.    Irregularities  in  the  Singular  have  no  explanation  in  com- 
mon with  that  for  the  irregular  plurals  mia,  tua,  sua. 

It  was  observed  in  the  beginning  of  this  essay  that  I  do  not 
believe  in  any  connection  between  the  irregularities  in  the 
singular  just  spoken  of,  and  like  ones  in  the  plural — mia,  tua, 
sua,  which  remain  to  be  discussed.  My  reasons  for  this  con- 
clusion are, 

First,  if  mia,  tua,  sua  are  to  be  explained  as  extensions  from 
the  singular  to  the  plural,  it  will  have  to  be  shown  that  they 
were  so  often  used  in  the  singular  for  the  masculine,  as  well 
as  for  the  feminine,  that  they  were  finally  adopted  as  the 


ITALIAN   POSSESSIVE   PRONOUNS.  21 

geneml  forms  for  both  genders  and  numbers  of  the  possessive 
pronoun  on  account  of  this  frequency  of  usage.  But,  as  shown 
above  (cf.  Table),  the  opposite  is  the  case,  the  masculine  being 
the  form  most  generally  used,  and,  if  such  an  extension  had 
been  carried  out,  mio,  tuo,  suo  would  have  been  the  forms 
adopted,  and  not  mia,  tua,  sua.  Mia  occurs  only  once  for 
mio  (UU)  and,  in  this  instance,  for  rhyme ;  sua  for  suo,  only 
twice  (X).  Also,  because  of  the  infrequency  of  such  occur- 
rences, it  would  be  very  difficult  to  prove  that  the  irregularity 
originated  in  the  singular, — a  fact  which  must  be  established 
if  it  is  asserted  that  it  was  extended  from  singular  to  plural. 

Secondly,  considering  the  mixture  of  forms  noted  in  the 
Table,  it  is  natural  to  suppose  that,  for  example,  as  suo  was 
used  for  sua,  suoi  and  sue,  so  sue  might  be  used  for  suo,  sua, 
suoi,  and  sua  for  suo,  suoi,  sue  ;  that  is,  there  was  a  promiscu- 
ous interchange  of  forms,  and  finally,  for  some  reason,  sua 
predominated  (and  similarly  mia  predominated  over  mio,  mie, 
miei,  and  tua  over  tuo,  tue,  tuoi) ;  hence  these  forms  as  found 
in  so  many  texts.  But  the  fact  that  eiFectually  annuls  such  a 
supposition  is,  that  by  comparison  of  texts  where  mia,  tua,  sua 
(plurals)  are  found  with  those  where  irregularities  in  the  singu- 
lar occur,  we  discover  that  only  two  of  the  texts  containing  the 
mia,  tua,  sua  forms  have  any  irregularities  in  the  singular  (O 
and  II ;  cf.  Table).  In  these  two  authors  the  plural  forms  can 
arise  from  no  mixture  with  the  singular,  for  the  irregularity 
referred  to  in  the  singular  is  in  the  use  of  mie  for  mio  and  suo 
for  sua  (where  in  mie,  mio,  mia  is  not  in  question) ;  and  even  if 
sua  was  used  for  suo,  there  would  be  no  connection  between  it 
and  sua  of  the  pluraal  (=  suoi  or  sue). 

If  these  two  objections  just  given  were  not  sufficient  of  them- 
selves to  militate  against  any  supposable  analogy  of  singular 
and  plural  irregularities,  either  by  extension  from  singular  to 
plural,  or  by  crossing  of  singular  and  plural,  I  should  still  fail 
to  see  the  necessity  of  casting  about  for  such  an  explanation 
w^ien  these  forms  {mia,  tua,  sua)  can  be  logically  accounted  for 
as  plurals.     And  now,  assuming  it  as  pretty  well  settled  that 


22  L.    EMIL    MEXGEE. 

the  singular  plays  no  part  in  the  development  of  such  plural 
forms  (^mia,  tua,  sua),  I  shall  proceed  to  discuss  them. 

3.     Notice  taken  by  early  grammarians  of  the  irregular 
plurals,  mia,  tuxi,  sua. 

The  first  notice  of  them  that  I  find  is  in  the  work  of  Mutio.^ 
In  discussing  the  Florentine  as  a  model  form  of  speech  the 
writer  says  fp.  12) :  "  Ma  per  Dio  vegcfiamo  ancora  un  poco, 
quanto  sia  vera,  che  essi  da'  padre  e  dalle  madre  piccioli  fan- 
ciulli  la  buona  lingua  apprendauo.  In  quel  libro  del  Tolomei 
lodansi  le  piu  Toscane  citta  di  Toscano  si  da  loro  questo  vanto, 
che  parlano,  piu  che  le  altre  Fiorentinamente.  Ft  dicesi  in 
Firenze :  /  versi  mia  (etc.,  enumerating  a  number  of  similar 
irregularities j — nelle  quali  non  si  serva  ne  numero,  ne  genere, 
ne  desinenza,  ne  forma  di  diritto  parlare." 

Again,  a  notice  of  them  is  found  in  a  work  by  Beni ;  ^  the 
writer  mentions  defects  of  the  Florentine  speech  and  says  (p. 
42j  :  "  Sicom  anco  il  dir  dua  per  due  ;  mia,  tua,  sua  per  mie, 
tue,  sue,''  etc. 


4.     Explanations  offered  by  later  grammarians. 

Among  the  more  modern  grammarians  we  find  these  peculiar 
forms  first  mentioned  by  Blanc.^  He  says  (p.  277)  :  "  Statt 
miei,  tuoi,  suoi;  mie,  tue,  sue,  liebten  die  Alten,  besonders  die 
Florentiner,  mia,  tua,  s'ua."  He  gives  three  examples  without 
comment. 

Diez,"*  Gram,  n,  90,  takes  no  notice  of  them,  except  in  a 
footnote  referring  to  the  passage  in  Blanc  just  quoted. 

Korting  ^  does  not  mention  them. 

^Battaglie  di  Hieronimo  Mutio,  per  difesa  ddVItalica  Unffua.     Vinegia,  1582. 

*  Paolo  Beni,  L' Anticrxisca  overo  H  Paragone  delP Itcdiana  Lingua.  Padova, 
1612. 

^Grammatik  der  lialianischen  Sprache.    Halle,  1844. 

*  GrammatU:  der  Eornani^hen  Sprachen,  4^*  Auflage.     Bonn,  1876. 

*  Encydop<Mdie  und  Jleihodologie  der  romanischen  Philologie.   Heilbronn,  1886. 


ITALIAN   POSSESSIVE   PRONOUNS.  23 

The  only  writer  who  has  spoken  of  them  at  length  is 
d'Ovidio,  who  in  the  Archivio  Glottologico  Italiano  (ix,  1886  : 
footnote,  p.  54),  says :  "  Ognun  ricorda  i  plurali  ambigeneri 
mia,  tua,  sua,  del  toscano  antico  e  moderno :  forme  popolari, 
comparse  solo  sporadicamente  e  timidaraente,  in  tutti  i  tempi, 
nella  lingua  eolta,  e  pur  di  vita  tenacissima.  lo  vi  ho  sempre 
ricouosciuto  una  bella  continuazione  del  neutro  plurale  latino. 
Una  ipotesi,  fonetica,  potrebbe  sorgere  a  contrastare  la  nostra 
spiegazione  morfologica  dei  plurali  mia  ecc.  La  grammatica 
neo-latina,  e  la  dialettologia  italiana  in  ispecie,  ci  da  copiosa 
messe  di  -a  epitetici  oppur  sostituentisi  ad  altre  atone  finali. 
Gia  finora  ne  siam  venuti  dando,  a  pi^  riprese,  parecchi  begli 
essempj,  e  qui  possiam  aggiungere  il  milan.  indova  {=  dove), 
lad.  nua,  abruzz.  donna  (=  donde),  \eccese  fraima  {^fratelmo). 
Or,  data  questa  tendenza  alF  -a,  niente,  si  potrebbe  dire,  di 
piii  naturale  che  i  pi.  fem.  mie,  tue  ecc.  direttamente,  e  i  msch. 
miei,  tuoi  ecc.  mercd  I'apocope  dell'  -i  e  la  ritrazion  dell'  accento 
fattisi  mie',  tuo'  ecc,  si  riducesser  tutti  a  mia,  tua  ecc.  Seu- 
nonche,  appunto  la  tendenza  all'  -a  per  ogni  altro  paese  e  stata 
dimostrata  che  per  la  Toscana  !  E  se  mie'  ecc.  si  fosse  per  sem- 
plice  vezzo  fonetico  fatto  mia  ecc,  non  si  capirebbe  come  questo 
vezzo  non  attaccasse  auche  le  voci  del  singolare  !  L'essere  sem- 
plici  plurali  quelli,  6  prova  che  I'origiu  loro  e  schiettamente 
morfologica." 

a.    Further  suggestions  which  are  unsatisfactory,    mei  >  mia 
by  analogy  to  lei  >>  lia. 

Meyer-Liibke,  It.  Gr.,^  §  375,  afler  quoting  from  this  state- 
ment of  d'Ovidio,  makes  another  suggestion  to  the  following 
effect :  out  of  the  shortened  forms  mie',  tuo\  suo\  as  used  for 
both  genders,  the  full  forms  miei,  tuoi,  suoi  were  developed  and 
used  for  both  genders  (cf.  Table).  Now,  just  as  these  full  two- 
gendered  forms  originated  in  the  masculine  plural,  so  mia  comes 
from  the  masculine  plural  form  mei,  and  then  is  used  for  both 

^Italienische  Grammatik.     Leipzig,  1890, 


((UHI7BIISIT. 


24  L.   EMIL   MENGER. 

genders  similarly  to  miei,  tuoi,  suoi.  (Instances  of  mei  used 
for  the  feminine  may  be  found  in  Crestomazia,^  p.  148,  line  119, 
le  mei  vertude  nd  le  mei  force ;  line  120,  le  mei  mani.  But 
occurrences  of  it  have  not  been  noted  in  Tuscan  texts ;  the 
selection  from  which  the  examples  just  given  were  taken,  is  in 
old  Venetian).  The  author's  explanation  of  mia  is  as  follows  : 
"  Wie  in  toskanischen  Mundarten  lei  zu  lia  wird^  so  konnte 
mia  aus  mei  auf  lautlichem  Wege  entstanden  sein,  und  ware  im 
XIV  bis  XVI  Jahr.  auch  in  die  Litterarsprache,  wenigstens  in 
die  Prosa,  gedrungen." — My  objection  to  this  theory  is:  mei 
and  lei  as  phonetical  elements  are  not  analogous,  and  the  -ei  in 
the  two  words  cannot  be  supposed  to  have  undergone  a  like 
development  because  of  the  difference  in  the  preceding  con- 
sonants, m  and  /.  In  X,  fo.  &iij,  occurs  the  form  glia  where 
I  mouille  was  probably  the  factor  which  raised  e  to  i,  and  the 
development  of  lia  <  lei  (no  matter  at  what  stage  of  the  lan- 
guage) always  went  hand  in  hand  with  the  pronunciation  of  I 
as  a  mouille  element;  it  is  impossible  to  omit  the  i  in  pronuncia- 
tion in  removing  the  tongue  from  the  mouille  to  a  lower  posi- 
tion.^— Further  proof  that  ia  <  ei  is  due  to  the  preceding  / 
mouille  is  found  in  the  fact  that  no  example  of  ei  >-  ia  is  noted 
in  other  words  ;  for  example,  via  (:=  rei),  dia  (=  dei,  DEi),  sia 
(=  sei,  sex)  do  not  exist.^  [Dialectic  sia  (2nd.  pers.  sing.  Pres. 
Subj.)  and  conditionals  in  -ria  (for  -rei)  cannot  be  adduced  as 
established  illustrations  of  the  phonetic  change  under  discussion 
since  there  is  no  objection  to  supposing  the  former  <  V.  L. 

^Creslomazia  lialiana  del  Primi  Secoli.  Per  Ernesto  Monaci.  Fascicolo 
Primo.     Citta  di  Castello,  1889. 

^An  example  of  such  a  lia  may  be  seen  in  Crestomazia,  p.  22,  line  114. 

^  It  will  probably  be  objected  to  this  that  the  process  was  the  reverse  of  what 
I  have  indicated  and  that  /  did  not  become  I  mouille  until  after  e  had  become 
i.  If  this  is  true,  i  is  the  factor  that  developed  I  mouille,  not  I  mouille  the 
one  which  developed  i.  The  question  cannot  be  decided  until  something 
more  definite  is  known  as  to  the  history  of  this  peculiar  form  lia. 

*0n  p.  38  will  be  found  an  example  of  dia=  dei  (debes),  which  would 
be  a  closer  analogy  for  mei  than  lei  is.  But  it  probably  owes  its  existence  to 
a  confusion  with  the  Subjunctive  Present  dia-<  dea<  deva. 


ITALIAN   POSSESSIVE   PRONOUNS.  25 

SEAS,  and  the  latter  had  its  origin  in  Imperfects  in  -ea.]  A 
further  objection  to  mia  <  met  is  evident  in  tiia,  sua,  unless 
these  forms  be  regarded  as  analogical  to  mia;  but  I  can  scarcely 
believe  that  forms  of  the  second  and  third  possessive  pronoun 
are  developed  by  analogy  with  a  like  form  of  the  first  person. 

6.    Result  of  position  in  stress-group. 

Again,  I  have  taken  as  my  norm  the  precept  of  Neumann : ' 
"AVir  miissen  stets  einen  Satz  im  Auge  behalten  :  ein  Wort 
entwickelt  sich  nie  an  sich,  sondern  stets  nur  gemass  der  Stel- 
lung,  die  es  im  Satzzusammenhang  einnimmt.  So  kaun  ein 
Wort,  resp.  die  Silbe  eines  Wortes  in  verschiedenem  Satzzu- 
sammenhange  oft  ganz  verschiedene  Betonung  haben,  es  kann 
einmal  den  Hochton,  ein  ander  Mai  Nebenton  oder  gar  keinen 
accent  haben,  -svodurch  naturgemass  eine  verschiedene  Lautent- 
wicklung  bedingt  ist."  I  have  tried  to  apply  this  principle  in 
accounting  for  the  development  of  mia,  tua,  sua;  for  example, 
in  MM,  where  such  numbers  of  these  irregular  pronominal 
forms  occur,  of  the  Avhole  number  of  mia  combinations  found 
(in  masc.  plu.)  one  hundred  and  thirty  are  before  the  noun, 
twenty-seven  after  it.  Of  the  feminine  plurals  (mia)  six  are 
before  the  noun,  two  after  it;  of  tua  (masc.  plu.)  three  are 
before  the  noun,  four  after  it;  of  sua  (masc.  plu.)  thirty-six 
are  before  the  noun,  fifteen  after  it;  of  sua  (fern,  plu.)  the 
three  forms  found  are  after  nouns.  But  these  proportional 
uses  show  nothing,  since  the  occurrence  of  more  irregular 
forms  before  than  after  the  noun  simply  agrees  with  the  con- 
struction of  the  regular  forms. — By  glancing  at  the  Table  (p. 
16)  it  will  be  observed  that  while  the  number  of  poets  who 
employ  these  peculiar  forms  is  greater  than  that  of  the  prose 
writers,  yet  the  use  of  them  is  so  limited  that  no  conclusion 
can  be  drawn  from  a  study  of  the  metre,  rhyme,  etc.  It  is 
evident,  therefore,  that  the  position  of  mia,  tua,  sua  in  the 
sentence  does  not  assist  in  discovering  their  origin. 

^  Literaiurblait,  iii,  467. 


26  L.    EMIL    MENGEE. 

c.  Phonetical  reductions. 

The  phonetical  development  of  these  forms,  as  mentioned 
by  d'Ovidio  (cf.  p.  23)  was  not  satisfactory  to  him,  since  he 
saw  at  once  the  inconsistency  of  positing  that  for  the  plnral, 
rmV,  tud',  suo'  were  reduced  to  mia,  tua,  sua,  but  the  singular 
forms,  mio,  tuo,  suo,  remained  unaffected.  I  think  if  such  a 
reduction  had  taken  place,  the  reduced  forms  would  have  been 
mi,  tu,  su,  and  not  with  an  -a  borrowed  elsewhere, — that  is, 
reduction  would  have  induced  a  shortening  of  the  forms,  not 
merely  a  change  of  final  -e  to  -a.  There  is  such  a  mi  found. 
In  O  (p.  56,  line  10,  note)  the  editor  (Prof  Nicola  Arnone) 
says  :  "  II  mi  non  e  che  un'  abbreviazione  di  mie'; "  the  sen- 
tence in  which  the  mi,  spoken  of  by  him,  occurred  was  "  da  11 
occhi  mi[e']  passo,  etc." — Such  a  reduction  of  me'>  mia  will 
be  still  more  difficult  to  prove,  when  the  examples  of  an  oppo- 
site reduction  on  p.  36  are  considered  ;  we  there  observe  many 
instances  of  the  first  and  third  person  present  Subjunctive  sia 
reduced  to  sie;  so  that  mie,  as  used  in  the  feminine  singular 
for  mia,  might  have  been  originally  a  reduction  of  the  latter;^ 
but  for  the  opposite  mie'y-  mia  the  only  analogy  found  is  that 
of  die  DiES>  dia,  but  in  this  case  the  change  is  due  to  rhyme. 

d.  Mia  adopted  from  a  confusion  of  mie^=  miei  and  mie'^ 

mia  (Sing.). 

The  form  mie'  {=  *miea  ?)  noted  above  (cf.  Table)  might 
have  had  some  influence  in  producing  the  irregular  mia.  On 
the  supposition  that  it  [mie')  existed  by  the  side  of  the  short- 
ened form  of  the  masculine  plural  (mie')  there  might  have 
arisen  in  the  minds  of  the  people  using  them  a  confusion  as 
to  the  difference  of  gender  and  number  of  the  two.  Thus,  on 
analogy  to  the  masculine  meus  a  mea  was  formed  out  of  which 
developed  *miea,  while  out  of  the  regular  mea  a  mia  also 
existed.     We  would  then  have  : 

1  Cf.  p.  18. 


ITALIAN    POSSESSIVE   PRONOUNS. 


27 


Masc.  Plu.  miei — mie', 

Fern.  Sing.  *miea — wuV — mia. 

Now,  when  mie'  (fern.)  ceased  to  be  nsed  and  mia  was  the 
only  form  existing,  the  masculine  plural  mie'  {=  same  as  femi- 
nine 7nie'  which  is  supposed  to  be  used  no  more,  but  is  replaced 
by  mia)  might  also  have  been  changed  to  mia  on  account  of 
this  confusion  of  mie'  (fem.  sing.)  and  mie'  (masc.  plu.).    This 
explanation  I  would  regard  as  preferable  to  that  of  a  phoneti- 
cal  reduction  of  mie'  to  mia,  since  in  the  latter  case  the  -a  has 
to  be  explained  (a  thing  not  satisfactorily  done  up  to  the 
present),  whereas  on  my  supposition  there  is  a  crossing  of  two 
forms,  one  of  which  already  had  the  -a.     Given  this  analogi- 
cal eifect  as  a  starting  point,  might  not  subsequent  speakers, 
having  lost  sight  of  its  origin  (as  a  crossing  with  feminine 
singular  mia)  have  looked  upon  this  mia  (=  mie'  masc.  plu.) 
as  a  feminine  also  used  indifferently  for  the  masculine  plural? 
Then  tua,  sua,  feminine  singulars  of  the  second  and  third  per- 
sons were  adopted  in  the  same  manner  for  masculine  plurals? 
The  extension  of  the  use  (of  mia,  tua,  sua)  from  masculine  to 
feminine  plural  would  be  rendered  all  the  easier  from  the  fact 
that  so  many  feminine  plurals  also  ended  in  -a  (from  the  Latin 
Neuters).     The  objection  might  be  raised  to  this  supposition 
that  these  forms,  mia,  tua,  sua,  are  not  also  extended  to  the 
singular  mio,  tuo,  suo,  but  the  analogical  development  sug- 
gested above  is  sufficient  answer  to  this ;  I  changed  the  -e  of 
mie'  (miei)  to  -a  from  the  crossing  of  this  form  with  an  original 
-a  (mia);  and  tua,  sua  followed  by  analogy  to  this.    Hence  it 
would  be  inappropriate  to  ask  of  me  why  tuo  (sing.)  does  not 
go  into  tua  as  well  as  tuo'  (tuoi). — This  development  would 
also  have  the  merit  of  being  evidently  an  early  one,  and  there- 
fore capable  of  accounting  for  an  early  appearance  of  mia, 
tua,  sua. 

Though  I  hold  this  explanation  of  the  phenomena  before 
us  to  be  more  plausible  than  those  offered  up  to  the  present, 
yet  it  is  unsatisfactory  also  to  me,  for  while  it  explains  mia, 


28  L.    EMIL    MENGER. 

it  does  not  explain  tua,  sua,  which  have  to  be  supposed  as 
analogous  to  mia:  the  latter  supposition  is  contrary  to  my 
assumption  (cf.  p.  25)  that  analogy  plays  no  perceptible  part 
in  the  development  of  the  forms  under  discussion. 

Resume  of  unsatisfactory  explanatioTis. 

After  this  brief  review  of  opinions  touching  the  development 
of  the  forms  under  discussion,  I  hold  that  the  following  explana- 
tions of  mia,  tua,  sua  are  unsatisfactory  for  the  reasons  given 
above. 

1.  That  they  are  extensions  of  irregularities  in  the  singular. 

2.  That  mia  was  developed  from  mei  and  then  used  for  both 
genders  as  miei,  tuoi,  suoi  once  were  so  used.  (This  I  consider 
as  the  strongest  phonetical  explanation  suggested,  but  the  pho- 
netic improbabilities  that  led  me  to  reject  it  strengthens  more 
firmly  my  confidence  in  the  explanation  given  below.) 

3.  That  the  irregularities  may  have  developed  by  virtue  of 
their  position  in  the  sentence,  as  tonic  or  atonic,  before  or  after 
the  noun  (or  otherwise). 

4.  That  mie\  tuo\  suo\  (=  miei,  tuoi,  suoi)  were  reduced 
phonetically  to  mia,  tua,  sua. 

5.  That  on  account  of  a  confusion  in  the  use  of  mie'  (miei) 
and  mie'  {^miea  ?),  when  mia  was  adopted  as  the  only  form  of 
the  feminine  singular,  mie'  of  the  masculine  plural  was  likewise 
reduced  to  mia. 

5.     Mia,  tua,  sua  are  remnants  of  the  Latin  Neuter  Plural. 

What  explanation,  then,  remains?  A  phonetical  develop- 
ment is  doubted  ;  analogy  is  not  admitted ;  therefore,  the  origin 
must  be  morphological,  and  the  only  morphological  explana- 
tion tenable  is  that  mia,  tua,  sua  rest  on  the  old  Latin  Neuter 
Plural.  Strengthening  such  a  supposition  is  the  fact  that  we 
find  many  remnants  of  the  old  Latin  Neuter  in  the  noun 
present  in  the  texts  examined ;  for  example,  in  H,  pp.  86,  98, 


ITALIAN   POSSESSIVE   PRONOUNS.  29 

101,  casteUa;  T,  ossa;  V,  Ameio,  p.  56,  le  sua  corna;  p.  57, 
le  labra  sua;  EE,  p.  21,  dua  ciglia ;  GG,  fo.  q  2,  dita  braccia; 
fo.  d,  ^e  ^wa  mura;  II,  fo.  fq  6,  /e  sua  alia;  J  J,  p.  372,  le 
membra  mia  ;  LL,  p.  38,  ossa  mia  ;  MM,  i,  390,  mia  lenzuola. 
In  F,  p.  23,  occurs  tucta  chotai  chose. — Neuter  plurals  of  the 
Latin  were  preserved  in  Italian  as  feminine  plurals  when  they 
had  collective  significations,^  and  it  may  be  seen  from  the  ex- 
amples just  cited  that  mia,  tua,  sua  are  found  before  such  nouns. 
I  think  that  the  existence  of  the  irregular  sua  in  Dante  (Purg. 
IX,  13,  le  sua  braccia),  where  it  has  this  collective  signification, 
settles  beyond  doubt  the  origin  of  the  form  as  a  Latin  Neuter 
Plural.  What  strengthens  the  supposition  that  this  is  a  Latin 
form  is,  that  Dante  employs  the  Latin  sui  also.^ — Now,  from 
their  (mia,  tua,  sua)  use  before  original  Latin  neuters  with 
collective  meaning,  they  were  next  employed  with  words,  not 
derived  from  Latin  neuters,  but  yet  having  a  dual  significa- 
tion ;  for  example,  in  AA,  iii,  179,  mia  par-enti;  J  J,  p.  70, 
occhi  mia;  MM,  i,  310,  mia  piedi;  mia  (due)  giovani,  etc. 
Many  of  the  forms  noted  in  MM  were  used  in  connection 
with  dua;  in  fact  I  think  there  must  have  been  a  strong 
analogy  between  these  pronominal  forms  and  dua,  since  as 
neuters  they  would  often  have  a  dual  signification,  and  in 
addition  to  this  here  is  a  word  (dua)  whose  formation  is  quite 
like  that  of  tua,  sua.  Dua  is  used  in  O,  GG,  II,  JJ,  LL, 
MM  and  NN,  and  it  is  to  be  noted  that  in  all  of  these  texts 
the  irregular  mia,  tua,  sua  occur,  and  especially  that  dua  does 
not  occur  earlier  than  these  forms  do,  but  they  (dua,  mia,  etc.) 
seem  to  appear  together  and  to  be  used  side  by  side,  and  that 
in  the  same  texts  Latin  neuter  plurals  of  nouns  are  pre- 
served. Thus  all  these  phenomena  (dua;  mia,  tua,  sua;  and 
the  nouns)  appear  as  a  revival  of  the  Latin  Neuter  under  the 
influence  of  which  all  these  forms  seem  to  have  arisen  about 
the  same  time;  the  other  forms  parallel  to  mia,  tua,  sua 


iCf.  Meyer-Liibke,  It.  Gr.,  ?^329  and  341. 

*  Cf.  Zehle,  Laut-  und  Flexionslehre  in  Dante's  Divina  Commedia.    Marburg, 
1886,  p.  13 :  "  Neben  tuoi,  mioi  stehen  bei  Dante  die  Latinismen  stri  und  tui." 


30  L.    EMIL    MENGER. 

strengthen  the  supposition  that  these  (mia,  tua,  sua)  too  are 
neuter  plurals  and  not  mere  isolated  examples. — Lastly,  from 
the  use  of  these  pronouns  before  original  neuters  with  collec- 
tive signification  ;  then  before  nouns,  not  neuters  but  having 
such  signification,  they  were  used  indiscriminately  before  sub- 
stantives of  all  kinds,  regardless  of  their  meaning. 

a.    Time  of  appearance  ;  originated  among  the  people  ;  extent 
of  employ ;  conclusion. 

As  may  be  seen  from  the  Table  (p.  16)  the  forms  under  dis- 
cussion are  found  in  texts  before  Dante ;  from  the  nature  of 
their  origin  (as  Neuter  Plurals)  we  would  naturally  expect  a 
line  of  direct  transmission  from  the  Latin;  the  fact,  therefore, 
of  their  occurrence  in  the  oldest  texts  is  further  proof  of  their 
oriirin  from  the  neuter.  Diez  ^  remarks  :  "  Von  einem  Alti- 
talienischen  im  Sinne  des  Altfranzdsischen  kann  keine  Rede 
sein ;  die  Sprache  des  xiii  Jh.  unterscheidet  sich  nur  durch 
einzelne,  namentlich  volksmassige  Formen  undWorter,  nicht 
durch  gram matischen  Ban,  von  der  Spatern."  The  same 
applies  to  mia,  tua,  sua;  they  were  first  used  by  the  early 
writers  who  employed  them  conscientiously  as  neuter  plurals; 
from  these  neuter  forms  their  use  was  extended  by  the  people, 
with  whom  the  forms  have  been  in  vogue  ever  since,  appear- 
ing from  time  to  time  in  literary  productions. 

Did  these  forms  originate  with  the  writers,  and  were  they 
carried  from  them  to  the  people,  or  was  the  reverse  the  case  ? 
Castelvetro,  speaking  of  other  words,^  says  :  "  Conciosia  cosa 
che  i  popoli  non  prendano  i  vocaboli  da  poeti  &  spetialraente 
da  simili  a  Dante  &  al  Petrarca  &  a  tali  quali  ha  poeti  la  lingua 
nostra,  che  a  pena  sono  letti  &  intesi  degli  'ntendenti  huomini 
con  molto  studio. — Non  trassero  dunque  i  nostri  poeti  le  pre- 
dette  parole  da  volumi  de  provenzali,  ma  della  commune  usanza 
del  parlare  italiano."     I  think  these  remarks  apply  also  to 

>  Gram,  i,  79. 

'^  Gorretione  dalcune  cose  del  dialogo  delle  lingue  di  Varchi,  et  una  giunta  al 
primo  libro  delle  -prone  di  M.  Pietro  Bemho.     Basilaea,  1572  ;  p.  175. 


ITALIAN   POSSESSIVE   PRONOUNS.  31 

mia,  tua,  sua,  and  for  two  reasons  :  first,  their  existence  in  the 
Latin,  and  appearance  later  in  early  Italian  necessarily  indi- 
cates their  preservation  by  the  people  during  the  time  for 
which  we  have  no  texts;  and  secondly,  because,  as  may  be 
seen  from  the  Table,  they  were  used  most  frequently  by 
popular  writers. 

Extent  of  employ.    The  proportion  in  MM,  where  the  great- 
est number  of  these  irregular  pronouns  was  found,  is  as  follows : 


miei,  54  times. 

mia  (      miei). 

157  times 

tuoi,      8 

tua  ( —  tuoi), 

7     " 

suoi,   68 

sua  (      suoi). 

51     " 

mie,  189 

mia  (      mie), 

8     " 

tue,     1 7 

sue,  145 

sua  ( —  sue), 

3     " 

I  have  marked  both  regular  and  irregular  forms  through- 
out my  reading,  and  I  may  give  those  of  V  as  an  example  of 
the  small  proportion  of  irregular  to  regular  constructions.  In 
this  author  we  find  the  regular 

miei,  211  times;  mie,  144  times. 

tuoi,     96      "  tue,     57      " 

suoi,  461      "  sue,  244      " 

(Irregular  forms  from  V  have  been  given  above,  p.  10.)  A 
like  enumeration  for  the  other  texts  would  show  a  similar 
proportion. 

Meyer-Liibke,  after  making  his  suggestion  as  to  the  develop- 
ment of  mia  (cf.  p.  23)  remarks  :  ^  "  Genaue  Untersuchungen 
iiber  die  Verbreitung  von  mia  in  alter  und  neuer  Zeit  werden 
dariiber  Auskunft  geben."  He  and  all  other  writers  on  the 
subject  treat  this  irregularity  as  specifically  Florentine.  I 
have  made  the  research  he  asked  for,  and  among  Florentine 
writers  of  four  centuries,  with  the  results  indicated  above 

1  It.  Or.  I  375. 


32  L.    EMIL   MENGEE. 

Chapter  II. 

Eegular  Forms  of  the  Possessive  Pronouns. 

A.     Tonic  e  and  i  in  hiatus;  mio;  miei. 

1.     Pi-evious  treatment  oj  hiatus  e. 

This  subject  has  been  treated,  according  to  my  knowledge, 
as  follows :  Meyer-Liibke  says:^  "Im  Hiatus  steht  fiir  e  vor 
i  der  Diphthong  ie,  vor  den  anderen  Vokalen  i  ohne  Riick- 
sicht  darauf  ob  e,  e  oder  i  zu  Grunde  liege :  mio,  mia,  mie : 
miei,  clio,  rio,  di  und  dia,  zio,  sia,  pria,  via,  io,  cria.  A  Is 
Buchworter  sind  reo  bei  Brunetto  und  Dante,  We,  rea  bei 
Dante  zu  betrachten. — Beachtenswerth  sind  ven.-pad.  pria 
rxeh^n  piera  (petra),  drio  Cort." — Again  :^  "  Vortonvokale 
im  Hiatus  sind  selten,  meist  sind  i,  e  und  u  in  dieser  Stellung 
schon  im  Vulgarlateinischen  zu  i,  n  geworden,  daher  furs  Itali- 
enische,  Konsonanten.  In  Buchw5rtern  oder  bei  sekundiirem 
Hiatus  bleibt  meist  der  Vokal  unveriindert,  doch  zeigt  e  vor 
o  and  e  Neigung  zu  i  zu  werden :  Hone,  niente  aber  reina." — 
Further,  d'Ovidio :  ^  "  i  im  lateinischem  Hiat  beharrt  als  i 
oder  wird  wieder  zu  i :  via,  sia,  pria,  d%  vom  arch,  die,  dia. 
(Indirekt  gehort  auch  6rio  hierher,  das  von  brioso  ebriosus 
abstrahiert  wurde)." — Again  :*  "  Es  giebt  eine  Reihe  Worter, 
die  den  Diphthongen  nicht  haben  und  die  doch  nur  volkstiim- 
lich  sein  konnen  :  sei  Verb,  sei  Zahlwort,  e  est. — Sei  Verb, 
welches  es  ist  mit  vorgeschlagenem  s  von  sono,  lautete  einst 
siei ;  das  erste  i  wurde  ausgestossen  durch  Dissimilation  und 
auch  in  Folge  hilufiger  proclitischer  Stellung  des  Wortes ;  das- 
selbe  gilt  von  sei  sex,  obschon  es  ein  tosc.  siei  nicht  giebt.  Die 
Proclisis  erkliirt  auch  ^  est." — Also  :  ^  "  Eine  eigene  Gruppe 

1  Jif.  Cr.  I  96.  ^Ihid.^\^\. 

^  In  Grundriss  der  Romanischen  Philologie.    Herausg.  von  Gustav  Grober. 
Strassburg,  1888.    i,  503,  §  15. 

^Grundriss,  i,  512,  §  26.  ^Orundriss,  i,  514,  §  29. 


ITALIAN   POSSESSIVE   PRONOUNS.  33 

bilden  die  Worter.  in  denen  e  im  Hiat  steht :  dies  wiirde  zuerst 
zu  ie  iind  vereiiffte  sich  dann  unter  dem  Einfluss  des  Hiats  zu 
i:  dio=^'^dico  deus,  arch,  rio  REUM,  arch,  cria  great,  mio, 
mia,  mie  meus,  io  *eo.  Gelehrt  oder  halbgelehrt  sind  dagegen  : 
dea.  dei,  reo,  crm.  In  miei  mei  behaiiptete  sich  ie  =  e  unter 
dem  Einfluss  des  Schkissvokals." — Finally  Caix  remarks: 
"  Tiitto  questo  c'induce  a  concludere  che  nella  prima  lingua 
poetica  Ie  forme  con  e  dovettero  essere  di  gran  lunga  Ie  piii 
frequenti. — Ma  nel  Toscano  fin  dai  piii  antichi  documenti  non 
s'incontrano  che  forme  con  /.  Dante  scrisse  Deo  solo  in  rima 
e  il  Petrarca  rarameute  meo. — Da  notare  e  solo  qnanto  a  REUS 
che  rio  e  del  verso,  e  reo  della  prosa." 

These  quotations  include  many  words  which  will  come  up 
for  discussion  in  the  present  division  of  this  monograph  ;  their 
occurrence,  as  well  as  other  forms  to  be  considered,  is  repre- 
sented as  follows  in  the  texts  consulted  : 

to,— A20,='  B133,  C  rule,-^  Do,  E20,  F  rule,  Gl,  H4,  111, 
JllO,  K161,  L4,  N  rule,  026,  P  rule,  Q  rule,  Rl,  S16 ;  rule 
in  T,  U,  V,  W,  X,  Y,  Z,  AA,  BB,  EE,  FF,  GG,  HH,  JJ, 
KK,  MM,  NN,  OO,  PP,  QQ,  RE,  SS. 

eo,— A57,  B26,  E75,  Fl,  LI 4,  04,  SI,  XI. 

mio—AU,  B59,  C  rule,  E6,  F  rule,  Gl,  12,  J15,  K46, 
L4,  N  rule,  05  ;  rule  in  P,  Q,  S(7),  T,  U,  V,  W,  X,  Y,  Z, 
AA,  BB,  CC,  DD(19),  EE,  FF,  GG,  HH,  JJ,  KK,  LL, 
MM,  NX,  OO,  PP,  QQ,  RR,  SS,  TT(8). 

meo— ASS,  B32,  E76,  L2,  CCl,  XI. 

mia,— Bl 26,  C  rule,  E48,  F  rule,  13,  Jll,  K21,  O  rule,  P 
rule,  Q  rule,  Rl,  SI,  Tl  ;  rule  in  U,  V,  X,  Z,  AA,  BB(32), 
DD(13),  EE,  FF,  GG,  HH,  KK,  MM,  PP,  TT. 

mea, — El,  X2. 

^Orioivi  della  Linijua  Poetica  Italiana.     Firenze,  1880.    §  14. 

*  The  numeral  following  a  capital  letter  represents  the  number  of  times 
a  form  occurs  in  the  given  author. 

*  '  Rule '  indicates  that  a  given  form  is  found  to  the  exclusion  of  variants 
of  the  same. 


34  L.    EMIL    MENGER. 


mie. 


3— B5,  Gl,  J2,  K3,  M2,  Rl,  T12,  U2, V144,  X  rule, 
Y2,  Z7,  AA16,  BBl,  CC5,  DDl,  EE25,  FF13,  GG34,  JJ24, 
LL8,  MM189,  SS20,  TT3. 

dio—Kl,  B20,  C  rule,  D2,  E2,  F  rule,  Gl,  H14,  19,  J42, 
K153,  L4,  M30,  N  rule,  P31,  Q  rule,  R2,  S2 ;  rule  in  T,  U, 
V,  W,  X(10),  Y,  Z,  A  A,  BB,  DD(4),  EE,  FF,  HH,  JJ,  KK 
(51),  LL,  MM,  NN(135),  PP,  SS. 

deo—A.12,  BIO,  E4,  Lll,  Pl,^  XI. 

diet  {=  fem.  of  d/o),— Xl,2  FFl.^ 

dee  {=  fem.  plu.  of  dio),— P2,*  V4,^  Y  rule,  LL2. 

Ho,— B3,  El,  F  rule,  K2,  N  rule,  P2,  SI,  V2,  X14,  Z  rule, 
AA  rule,  BB2,  CCl,  FF2,  GG7,  HH  rule,  JJ5,  KKIO,  MM 
rule,  NN44,  PP  rule,  SS5,  TT2. 

reo,— A2,  B12,  Nl,  P7,  V8,  X14,  FF6,  GG6,  114,  JJl, 
NN4,  SS4. 

ria,—QA,  F  rule,  HI,  K2,  N  rule,  P5,  SI,  VI,  X3,  AA 
rule,  BBl,  FFl,  GG3,  HH  rule,  JJ3,  KKll,  MM  rule, 
NN37,  PP  rule,  SS4,  TTl. 

rm,— El,  N2,  PI,  V13,  X9,  BB2,  CCl,  FF2,  GG5,  III, 
KK1,NN26,  SS13. 

rie,—F  rule,  Hi,  Kl,  N3,  NN3. 

ree—M.1,  N2,  PI,  NN4. 

>,— B5,  El,  Ol,  XI. 

feo—Bl,'  HI. 

pz'o, — O,  T,  V,  SS. 

jpia, — V. 


mei, — All  examples  of  this  have  been  given  above  (cf. 
Table,  p.  16). 

m/ei,— A2,  B4,  C  rule,  F  rule,  J4,  K4,  L3,  M9,  N22,  OlO, 
Rl,  SI,  V211,  X  rule,  Y8,  Z8,  AA44,  BB7,  CCll,  DDl, 

^  Purg.  XVI,  35 :  veo :  feo.  *  fo.  hiij :  profecia :  maria. 

'p.  184:  Singular  mia  madonna  ed  alma  dia.    These  are  the  only  exam- 
ples found  of  clia;  in  all  other  cases  the  Latin  dea  is  preserved. 
*Purg.  XXXII,  3  ;  Par.  xxviii,  41. 
^Ameto,  pp.  11,  65,  86.  «p.  121:  reo:  feo. 


ITALIAN    POSSESSIVE   PRONOUNS.  35 

EE26,  FF15,  GG28,  HH  rule,  JJ70,  KK35,  LL8,  MM54, 
NN44,  PP  rule,  SS28,  TT5. 

dei,—J.4,  P4,  Xll,  Y6,  BBl,  LL6,  NNIO,  SS  rule. 

dn,—K2,  PI/  T71,  V124,2  X2,  Yl,  BB5,  EEl,  OO. 

rei—BS,  14,  K2,  LI,  Ml,  Tl,  V  rule,  X6,  FF4,  TTl. 

riei, — F9. 

rii—Fl.^ 

lei,—B[,  CI,  F  rule,  LI,  O  rule,  T,  X  rule. 

liei—Gl,'  Jl,=  K2,  Ll,«  Nl,^  TT4.« 

sei  (=ES),— CI,  P,  Fl,  V  rule,  X,  Y  rule,  Zl,  II  rule, 
LL3,  SSrule,  FFl. 

siei  (=sei,  Es), — Jl.^ 

piedi  {=  pedes), — H,  14,  U  rule,  X. 

piei—R2,  J2,  K3,  X3,  TT  rule. 

pel, — XL 

dei  (=  DEBES),— C5,  F112,  Ml,  N2,  01,  P,  T3,  V  rule, 
X3,  Z  rule,  GG4,i»  llj^  sg4_ 

diei  (=  dei,  debes), — K6." 


se'  {=sei,  ES),— F20,  Nl,^^  Ol,  P,  SI,  Zll,  BBl,  CCl, 
FFl,  GG,  LL,  TTl. 

see  (=  set:),— N3.^^ 

sie  {=sei)—FS,''  P2,^^V1,^«  TT2.^7 

1  Also  pii  (plu.  of  pio) :  Purg.  XXI,  24;  Par.  IX,  26. 

'^ dei  occurs  also  in  V.  'Inf.  xxii,  22:  desii:  rii:  partii. 

*p.  35.  *p.  41.  6 p.  198.  'p.  3. 

^pp.  56,  59,  80  {liei:  miei),  109.  In  this  author  occur  also,  p.  76,  costiei: 
piei;  p.  78,  costiei:  miei;  p.  82,  coliei. 

'*Cf.  Creslomazia,  p.  161,  line  10.     Same  line,  utiei. 

^"Here  also  debi;  cf.  fo.  b  3. 

"  First  example  is  on  p.  28.  Occurrences  of  giudei,  sei  (sex),  bei  (bevi) 
have  been  noted,  but  they  do  not  occur  in  any  of  the  texts  examined,  under 
diphthongized  forms. 

'2  p.  267.  '3pp_69,  215. 

'*  First  ex.  p.  5.  '^  Purg.  xxv,  11. 

>'  Decam.  fo.  Bb :  tu  sie  il  ben  venuto. 

"p.  86 :  tu,  sie  la  ben  trovata;  p.  87  :  sa'  che  tu,  sie  si  crudel. 


*-»3r 


36  L.    EMU.    MEXGER. 

sie  {=  1st  pers.  Subj.  Pres.)  — TTl/  Pl.^ 

sie  (=  2nd  pers.  Siibj.  Pres.)  — P3,^  V5/  112;  TT4.« 

sie  {=  3rd  pers.  Subj.  Pres.),— PI  /  V3.« 

sia{=sm), — Pl.^ 

§ii(=sei,  ES)— V2/''Z1." 

dia  {=  3d.  pers.  Subj.  Pres.  of  dare),— C  rule,  Fl,  HI,  J7, 
Kl,  Nl,  Rl,  T  rule,  DDS,  KK6,  TTl. 

dea  (=  3d.  pers.  Subj.  Pres.  of  dare),— BS,  Dl,  MS,^^  X2,^* 
P2,"  YQ.'' 

dii  (=  2nd.  pers.  Subj.  Pres.  of  dare), — Yl.^® 

die  (=  3d.  pers.  Subj.  Pres.  of  dare), — DDl.^^ 

^  p.  55 :  d'onorar  un  tal  giomo  non  sie  ingrato. 

*Purg.  XX,  14:  prima  clie  {io)  sie  morto. 

^Purg.  XVI,  5 :  Guarda,  che  da  me  tu  non  sie  mozzo ;  Par.  xv,  16 :  bene- 
delto  sie  lu;  Par.  xxix,  22:  sie  {tu)  certo. 

* Decam.  fo.  C  (twice) ;  fo.  Lb;  fo.  Miij  ;  fo.  Y. 

=  fo.  ez:  fa  {tu)  che  non  sie  polaco  ne  tedesco;  fo.  fq.  8:  Fiolo  mio,  sie 
vago  du  dire  cosa  ecc. 

^p.  58:  che  tu  non  sie  veduto;  p.  78:  che  tu  s/e  nostra;  vogliam  che  tu 
sie  la  nostra  dama  ;  p.  86 :  che  tu  sie  benedetta. 

'  Purg.  XXX,  36 :  Perche  sie  colpa.  Sie  is  the  reading  of  three  of  the 
Mss.,  sia  that  of  one. 

^Decani,  fos.  Cij  ;  Cbj6;  Xiij. 

^  Purg.  XX,  4 ;  one  Ms.  here  reads :  maladetta  sia  tu,  the  three  others  sie. 

'^"Decani,  fo.  Obj  2:  quanto  tu  sii  da  me  amata ;  Amelo,  p.  78:  tu  sola  sii 
donna  di  me. 

'^  tu  sii  la  ben  tornata.  Cf.  here  //  Torto  e  il  Diriito  del  non  si  Pud,  dato  in 
giudicio  sopra  molie  regole  della  lingua  Italiana.  Esaminato  da  Ferrante  Lon- 
gobardi.  Roma,  1655,  p.  77:  Tu  sii  e  tu  sia  si  dice  ugualmente  bene  ne 
tempi  che  cotal  terminatione  ricevono.  E  simile  delle  altre  maniere  de' 
verbi  che  '1  soffrono ;  avegna  che  alcuni  scrittori  e  infra  gli  altri  il  Boccaccio 
habbiano  piu  volentieri  finiti  cosi  fatti  tempi  delle  seconde  persone  in  i 
che  in  a. 

'«pp.  25,  35.  13  pp.  50,  457. 

'*Inf.  XXXIII,  42:  Innanzi  ch'Atropos  mossa  le  dea;  Purg.  xxi,  5:  Dio 
vi  dea  pace. 

^^Decani.  fo.  Jbj  8,  9:  Dio  gli  dea  il  buon  anno  ;  Dio  mi  dea  la  gratia  sua  ; 
fo.  Hjv :  se  Dio  ti  dea  buona  ventura,  etc. 

^^Ameto,  p.  50:  innanzi  che  tu  dii  materia  di  turbamento. 

"  Dio  ti  die  grazia. 


ITALIAN    POSSESSIVE   PRONOUNS.  37 

deano  {=  3d.  pers.  Plu.  Subj.  Pres.  of  dare), — VI. ^ 

stia  (=  3d.  pers.  Pres.  Subj.  of  .store),— Bl,  II,  Kl,  Rl,  Ti. 

stea  {=  3d.  pers.  Pres.  Subj.  of  stare),— B2,  M2,2  PS,^  VlO," 

stii  (=  2nd.  pers.  Subj.  Pres.  of  store),— BBl.'' 
steano  (=3rd.  pers.  Plu.  Subj.  Pres.  of  store), — VI. ^ 


deve,—C2,  SI,  T4,  SS3. 

dee  {=deve),—B2,  C7,  D9,  E2,  F6,  H3,  116,  M3,  N30, 
P,  R4,  S7,  Tl,  Vrule,  XI,  AA2,  FFl,  GG4,  KK6,  LL6, 
SS5. 

de  {=  deve),—B7,  C5,  Dl,  F68,  H6,  Nl,  P,  S6,  T5,  U  rule, 
XI,  Z8. 

de  {=dei,  debes), — F28,  Zl.^ 

di  (=  deve), — N.^ 

die  {=  deve),— G  rule,''  J7,  K12,ii  N3,^=^  S2,  T9,  EEl.^^ 


^Deeam.  fo.  Dbj  2. 

^  pp.  10,  13  :  non  piaccia  clie  I'anima  s<ea  in  prigione. 
^  Inf.  XXXIII,  41 :  Come  il  mio  corpo  slea  ;  Purg.  ix,  48,  Quando  a  cantar 
con  organi  si  stea  ;  Purg.  xvii,  28  :  Se  i  pie  si  stanno,  non  slea  tuo  sermone  ; 
Par.  II,  33 :  Fa  che  *  *  *  ti  slea  un  lume ;  Par.  xxxi,  15 :    E  spera  gia  ridir 
com'  ello  stea. 

*Ameto,  p.  39  :  che  seguer  i  suoi  piacer,  convien  che  stea 
A  tal  dover  con  I'animo  suggetto, 
Che  quel  che  se  non  vuole,  altrui  non  dea. 

ibid.  p.  43 :  voi  dovete  imaginare  come  egli  stea.    ibid.  p.  61 : 

Et  di  quel  caldo  tal  frutto  si  crea 
Che  se  ne  acquista  il  conoscere  iddio 
Et  come  vada,  &  venga,  &  dove  stea. 

ibid.  p.  77 :  sia  adunque  *  *  *  et  dea  al  vero  efFetto.    Decam.  fo.  Hbj  4 :  luna 
qui  si  stea  dentro ;  also  fos.  Pbj  2,  Qbj,  Xiij,  Yb,  Aaiij,  Aabj  9. 

*  XXIX,  26.  ^  p.  8  :  non  vo'  che  iu  stii. 

''i)eca?n.  fo.  Xiij.  ^p.  61. 

^p.  24:  vostra  fine  non  di'  essare.     There  is  a  note  to  this  as  follows 
Intendi,  di'  per  die,  o  dee,  o  de'.     Come  qui  presso  ed  altrove:  de'  essare. 

'"  deve,  dee  and  de'  do  not  occur  in  this  text. 

^^  First  example,  p.  36. 

'*p.  12:  si  die  pensare;  p.  34:  gli  porti  '1  censo  che  gli  die  dare;  p.  37 : 
uomo  die  morire.  ''che  die  venire. 


38  L.   EMIL    MENGER. 

die  (=  dei), — K4.^ 

dea{=deva),—Sl,  FF2.2 

dia  {=  deva), — S4.^ 

dia{=dei),—Tl.' 

dei  {=  deve), — F7/ 

deono  {=  devono),—J)l,  H4,  J3,  Nl,  V  rule,  Z2. 

diano  (=  devono), — Ll/ 

dieno  (=  devono), — PI  7 


dia  {=  dies),— DD2.« 

Die  {=  Dio,  Deus),— DD1,«  TTl. 


leone—1,  Ml,  N3,  01,  P5,  T8,  X,  Y,  BB  rule,  GG22, 
SS3,  LL5. 

lione,—Elb,  PI,  Tl,  CC],  GG51. 

leoni,—Ml,  Nl,  T3,  GG2,  SSI. 

lioni,—N\^,  GG5. 

leale,—A\,  Bl,  El,  M  rule,  N49,  S  rule,  FF  rule. 

^An  evident  contraction  of  diei. 

*p.  100:  dea:  Citerea;  p.  120:  come  dea  far  chi  vuol  prender  dottrina. 

'  The  variants  of  different  Mss.  of  the  canzoni  of  this  author  read  alter- 
nately dee,  die,  dia  and  dea.  The  two  latter  are  equivalent  to  deve  in  mean- 
ing, but  the  -a  shows  that  they  must  be  substitutions  of  Subjunctive  for 
Indicative. 

*  priego  che  tu  mandi  colui  die  tu  dia  mandare. 

^p.  9:  parolle  non  dei  usare  chi,  etc.  p.  12:  ti  dei  muovere;  p.  66:  s'ella 
si  fae  si  come  non  dei ;  p.  66:  (egli)  non  dei  curare. — Aside  from  any  pho- 
netic reason  that  may  be  assigned  for  this  form,  a  reasonable  explanation 
may  be  found  in  the  indiscriminate  use  of  dei  for  both  second  and  third 
person  singular.  On  the  same  page  occurs  a  direct  admonition:  "tu  non 
dei,  ecc,"  and  immediately  afterward  follows  an  indefinite  statement:  "egli 
non  dei,  ecc." 

*p.  200  :  le  gioie  che  d'amore  diano  venire. 

'  Purg.  XIII,  7 :  Esser  dieii  sempre  li  tuoi  raggi  duci. — In  various  texts 
occur  the  forms  beo  (bevo),  creo  (credo),  veo  (veggio).  In  N  are  many  examples 
of  bee,  bea  (of.  pp.  158,  471)  which  are  always  printed  with  the  circumflex 
accent,  hie,  bea,  as  is  also  die. 

*  p.  5 :  dia :  mia ;  p.  31  :  dia :  partia  ;  die  also  occurs  in  a  few  cases. 
®  p.  15  :  Die  ti  mantenga. 

lOp.  72:  che  Z)ie  gli  dia. 


ITALIAN   POSSESSIVE   PRONOUNS.  39 

Hale— hi,  N26. 
leali—^U. 
liali,— ^10. 
Ieanza—B1,C\,E1,^4. 

lianza, — N6. 

reale— rule  in  H,  I,  N(3),  T,  BB,  FF,  SS. 

reame,— CI,  H  rule,  JIO,  M4,  Nl,  rule  in  T,  V,  X,  Z. 

torneamento, — N35,  PI. 

torniamento, — N22,  PI . 

neuno,—F  rule,  17,  J27,  K9,  L2,  M3,  N14,  VI,  Z13. 

nmno,—C\,  H28,  127,  M18,  NlOO,  T16,  V4,  Zl,  EE,  II 

rule. 

nexma,—F  rule,  14,  J13,  K7,  L4,  N32,  Z3. 

wmna,— H8,  124,  MS,  N102,  F5,  EE  rule.^ 

neente,—C\,  K3,  M15,  S3,  Z15. 

niente,-Q,  H3, 18,  K5,  SIO,  rule  inV,  X(2),  Y,  Z(20),  FF, 
II,  LL(1). 

The  examples  given  above  (pp.  33-39)  will  now  be  used 
in  the  consideration  of  three  questions  which  arise  in  a  study 
of  hiatus  E  : 

Does  hiatus  prevent  the  development  of  i>  ef 

Does  hiatus  close  e,  thus  making  it  i  f 

Does  hiatus  prevent  the  development  of  E>  ief 

2.     Does  hiatus  prevent  the  development  ofi>ef 

Where  i  is  found  alike  in  a  Latin  and  Italian  word,  has  it 
been  preserved  in  the  latter  directly  from  its  Latin  form,  or 
has  it  first  developed  into  e  (as  it  does  in  positions  other  than 
hiatus)  and  then  been  raised  again  to  i  ?  In  a  treatment  of 
this  question,  the  following  words  must  be  considered :  brio, 
dia  and  die,  pio,  pria,  quia,  sia,  stria,  via. 

1  The  proportional  use  in  the  Bandi  Lucchesi  del  sec.  XIV.     Bologna,  1863, 
is:  neuno,  42,  neuna,  118. 
niuno,  9,    niuna,  3. 


40  L.    EMIL   MENGER. 

brio  (<  EBRio, — aee).^ 

This  word  does  not  occur  as  breo, 

dia  and  die  {=  diem). 

That  this  word  passed  through  an  e-  stage  (*cZe,  *c?ea)  is 
hardly  probable ;  a  comparison  with  other  Romance  languages 
indicates  that  it  did  not  thus  develope  in  a  part  of  the  field,  at 
least;  for  it  is  found  preserved  in  Sardinian  {die),  Proven§al 
{dis,  dia),  Old  French  [die)  and  Spanish  {dio). 

pio  (=  Pius). 

Corresponding  to  this  is  jjio,  Span.,2)m-s  Prov.,  and  no  pre- 
ceding e-  stage  is  to  be  supposed  for  either  of  these  languages. 

pria  (=  pria). 

This  Avord  exists  only  in  Italian,  and  no  preceding  *prea 
has  been  noted  for  it. 

quia  (=:  quia). 

It  is  hardly  to  be  questioned  that  quia  is  a  preservation  of 
the  Latin  form. 

sia  {=  SIM  and  sit). 

In  this  set  of  Tuscan  texts  examined  by  me,  no  form  sea 
occurs.  It  is  remarkable  that  authors  who  use  dia  and  dea 
[dare),  stia  and  stea  (stare)^  should  seem  to  recognize  sia  as 
the  only  form  for  this  verb ;  the  fact  that  dea  and  stea  are 
found  in  the  earliest  texts  and  as  late  as  Bojardo,  while  sea 
does  not  so  occur,  seems  to  indicate  that,  for  the  Tuscan,  sea 
never  existed.  The  parallelism  does  not  appear  between  the 
Tuscan  and  northern  dialects,  such  as  will  be  noted  in  the  case 
of  hiatus  tj.^  The  latter  developed  o  in  both  of  the  territories 
just  indicated  but  e  out  of  hiatus  i  is  found  only  in  the  North.* 

lAscoli,  Archil:  Qlot.  Itai,  in,  455.  ^  cf.  p.  36.  3  Cf.  p.  61. 

*  Examples  of  sea  may  be  found  in  the  Ch-estomazia :  pp.  86,  1.  44 ;  102,  1. 
20;  105,1.  147;  112,1.  113;  113,1.  134;  135,1.  15;  137,1.28;  141,  1.87; 
145,  1.  14,  20;  146,  1.  41,  48,  55;  147,  1.  65,  66.— A  statement  as  to  the  dis- 
like of  the  Tuscan  for  the  e-forms  is  found  in  Ampliatione  delLa  lingua  volgare 


ITALIAN    POSSESSIVE   PRONOUNS. 


41 


This  word  should  not  be  included  in  the  examples  given  by 
Meyer-Liibke/  for  from  his  rule  we  are  to  understand  that 
all  words  mentioned  there  passed  through  an  g-stage.  The 
explanation  of  the  word  as  given  in  §  448  contradicts  this  sup- 
position, however,  and  seems  to  imply  that  the  i  is  supposed 
to  have  remained:  "  Der  Konjunktiv  sia  erkliirt  sich  aus 
jilterem  SiM  durch  Anfiigung  des  Konjunktiv  -a." 

stria  (=  stria). 

The  I  is  kept  here  also  in  Fr.  strie,~  Span,  estria. 

via  {==  viam). 

Via  and  sia  are  parallel  in  their  development.  Fr.  voie, 
soil  leave  no  room  for  doubt  that  for  this  language  there  was 
a  preceding  vea,  seat  (later  veie,  seit  >  voie,  soit).  But  for 
the  Tuscan  no  vea  is  found. 

These  examples  show  that  in  Tuscan  no  e-stage  is  to  be 
supposed  for  words  which  have  lived  on  with  primary  hiatus  i. 

To  this  list  must  be  added  words  that  have  originally  Latin 
i,  which  is  retained  in  both  primary  and  secondary  hiatus :  zio 
(*thiltm),  stio  (aestIvum),  vie  (vIve),  rio  (poetic  form  of  nvo 
<  rivum). 

Also  to  be  added  are  sio  (botanical),  ghio  (maritime),  trio, 
dia  ('divine,'  Par  xiv,  11 ;  xxiii,  36  ;  xxvi,  3),  spio  and /o. 
The  germanic/e^M  gave  in  Italian  /zo  and /<?m(/o,  and  the  e  in 
the  example  o^feo  (cited  above,  p.  34)  was  probably  introduced 
from  analogy  to  feudo. 

Thus,  the  answer  to  our  first  question  (Does  hiatus  prevent 
the  development  of  i>e?)  must  be  given  in  the  affirmative; 

by  M.  Vitale  Papazzoni.  Venetia,  1587,  p.  5 :  "  Dea  per  dia  dal  Verbo  dare, 
usano  alcuni  moderni  contra  '1  commun'  uso  degli  altri,  &  non  so  perche. 
Ke  io  per  me  lascierei  il  niio  i^L-  degli  altri  solito  dia,  salvo  se  non  volessi 
parer  piu  tosto  Napolitano  die  Toscano  o  Lombardo  ragionevole." 

1  It.  Gr.  I  96.     Kule  quoted  above,  p.  32. 

*  cf.  Scheler,  Dictionnaire  d' Etymologie  Frangaise.  3me  Ed.  Paris  et  Brux- 
eUes,  1888.     p.  476. 


42 


L.    EMIL    MENGEE. 


the  Tuscan  treats  alike  i  and  i  in  hiatus,  since  it  preserves 
both  of  them.^ 


3.     Does  hiatus  close  E,  thiis  making  it  if 

This  question  has  been  considered  by  d'Ovidio/  and  his 
conchision  is  (p.  37)  :  '^  Nessun  certo  esempio,  adunque,  ci 
occorre  di  e  da  e  lat.,  o  di  e  romanza  qualunque,  che  si  chiuda 
in  i  per  I'iato."  A  difficulty  arises  here  because  of  the  lack  of 
examples  of  original  Latin  hiatus  e,  the  rule  being,  as  given 
by  Seelmann  :^  "Kiirzung  von  vocalen  konnte  erfolgen,  wenn 
denselben  direct  andere  folgten."  There  is  one  case,  however, 
of  e  in  secondary  hiatus  before  e,  with  the  result  that  it  was 
raised  to  i;  this  e  (afterward  i)  was  also  long,  and  hence  could 
not  have  been  diphthongized  (>ie)  and  reduced  later  to  i. 
This  example  is  die  (==  dee  =  deve,  cf.  p.  37).  It  is  treated 
by  d'Ovidio,  but  the  only  example  of  its  occurrence  which  he 
found  was  that  from  "un  antico  testo/orsefiorentino."  Caix* 
mentions  "die,  dia-no  accanto  a  dea,  forma  del  conjiuntivo  che 
in  Guittone  vale  anche  per  Findicativo,"  and  again  (p.  220) 
"  in  Barberino  tanto  dea,  quanto  dia  e  dieno  occorrono  piii 
volte."  The  examples  gathered  from  our  texts  show  a  more 
extended  use  of  the  forms  than  these  quotations  would  indi- 
cate. For  die  there  can  be  but  one  explanation ;  its  Latin 
original  was  debet  and  hence  the  tonic  e  never  diphthong- 
ized ;  the  immediate  predecessor  of  the  present  form  was  dee^ 
and  the  hiatus  position  of  e  is  the  only  cause  which  suggests 
itself  for  the  raising  of  this  e  to  i. — Similarly  in  the  plural, 

^None  of  the  words  thus  far  treated  are  covered  by  Meyer-Liibke's  rule 
(/if.  Gr.  I  96)  since  the  beginning  of  the  rule — "Im  Hiatus  steht  fiir  e" — 
implies  that  all  words  mentioned  under  it  were  either  originally  E  or  e  <  i ; 
in  either  case,  he  supposed  an  e-stage  to  have  preceded  any  later  change. 
The  rule  would  even  seem  to  imply  that  the  i  in  *thium  developed  *zeOy 
then  210,  as  this  example  is  found  among  those  given  under  the  rubric. 

"^Arch.  Glot.  It.  IX,  35-37. 

^  Die  Aussprache  des  Latein.     Heilbronn,  1885,  p.  79. 

*  Origini,  p.  219,  §  215. 


ITALIAN   POSSESSIVE   PEONOUNS.  43 

apart  from  the  variants  of  the  ending  -ono;  as,  -ano  or  -eno,^ 
the  change  of  e>  i  is  due  to  hiatus  position."  The  form  cW 
(z=z  dee)  as  found  in  N  in  the  construction  dVessare  might  seem 
to  have  developed  in  pretonic  position  (in  which  position  every 
E  >  r;^  as,  misura  <  mensuram,  sicuro  <  securum),  and  if 
die  is  understood  to  have  thus  developed,  hiatus  would  not 
enter  here  into  consideration.  But  the  tendency  for  pretonic 
E  to  become  i  was  a  popular  one,  and  if  the  e  in  dee  had  thus 
become  i,  the  resultant  form  that  would  have  been  used  most 
frequently  and  been  preserved,  would  be  die,  not  dee,  just  as 
we  have  misura,  sicuro  and  many  similar  words  with  i,  not  e. 
The  fact  that  dee  has  always  been  the  more  common  form 
indicates,  therefore,  that  die  is  not  a  development  due  to  pre- 
tonic position,  but  that  the  word  developed  independently, 
the  first  e  becoming  i  because  of  its  hiatus  position. 

Bea,  stea  (<  dare,  stare)  may  have  developed  later  into  dia, 
stia  through  the  closure  of  e  >  i  in  hiatus,  but  these  words 
cannot  be  adduced  as  reliable  examples  of  such  a  change,  since 
it  is  probable  that  they  became  dia,  stia,  by  analogy  to  sia  ;  * 
reciprocal  influences  of  dare,  stare  and  essere  forms  con- 
stantly occur  in  the  Romance  languages. 

a.    Further  proof  of  e  >  i  in  hiatus  :  conditionals  in  -ria. 

We  must  here  consider  conditionals  in  -ria  instead  of  -m,* 
the  former  being  <  the  Infinitive  with  Imperfect  otavere;  the 
latter  (-rei)  offers  nothing  for  consideration  in  connection  with 
the  present  topic  (of  e  being  raised  to  i  by  hiatus).  The  suc- 
cessive stages  of  development  of  this  -ria  formation  may  be 

^  And  in  F  deuno  is  found. 

■^  Dieno  is  not  to  be  supposed  as  analogical  to  forms  like  sieno  or  condi- 
tionals like  sarieiw,  for  in  these  cases  the  preceding  stage  was  siano,  sariano; 
the  point  to  be  noted  in  dieno  is  not  the  ending  -eno  but  the  fact  that  e>i 
before  this  ending,  however  the  latter  may  have  originated.  (Cf.  Gruiidriss, 
I,  540,  §  94 :  1st  ea  in  von  einem  konsonanten  gefolgt,  so  ensteht  daraus  ie 
also  avia,  avieno,  etc.") 

»Cf.  Meyer-Liibke,  It.  Gr.  §  123. 

*  Cf.  Meyer-Liibke,  It.  Gr.,  ^  461.         *  Ibid.,  U  -103,  404. 


44  L.    EMIL    MENGER. 

traced  in  our  texts.  First,  in  1j,  we  find  the  Imperfect  alone 
used  for  the  Conditional  (p.  203) :  "  chesso  dicea  quelli  ke 
fugera  delabatallia  non  fugera  dalicani,  ke  le  sue  carne  facia 
alimastini  magiare  ; " — (p.  208)  :  "  el  medico  di  Pirro  venue 
a  Fabritio  celatamente  e  disseli  ke  selli  livolea  dare  cotanto 
avere  chelli  ucidea  Pirro."  The  next  step  was  -rea,  which  is 
found  represented  in  the  same  text  (L)  in  forms  such  as  mecta- 
rea  (p.  200),  piaccierea  (p.  202),  averea  (p.  211),  sirea  (p.  212). 
The  last  stage  was  -7-ia.  This  form  is  found  as  follows  :  ^ 
All,  B77,  C44,  E29,  K2,  L9,  N42,  012,  P69,  S24,  T15,V74, 
X7,  Y8,  Z24,  BB7,  CC2,  DD4,  EEl,  FFl,  GG34, 116,  LL8, 
SS21,  TT5.  Is  this  an  example  of  hiatus  e  {-rea)  raised  to  i 
{-ria)  ?  If  we  accept  the  testimony  of  Castelvetro  we  must 
answer  in  tlie  negative.  In  his  work  cited  (p.  30)  p.  190  he 
is  discussing  a  number  of  words  which,  according  to  Bembo, 
Petrarch  took  from  the  Proven9al,  among  them  havia,  solia, 
credia  ;  of  these  he  observes  :  "  Niuno  nega,  che  non  sia  uso 
della  Provenza  il  dire  havia,  solia,  credia,  ma  cio  non  basta  a 
provar  lo  'ntendimento  del  Bembo.  Adunque  bisognerebbe 
che  egli  potesse  negare  con  verita,  che  fosse  o  fosse  stato  uso 
d'una  buona  parte  d'ltalia  mai,  &  spetialmente  della  patria 
mia,  nella  quale  non  solo  si  dice  havia,  solia,  credia,  ma  anchora 
haviva,  soliva,  crediva,  doude  e  non  di  Provenza  I'hauno  prese 
<fe  il  Petrarca  &  Dante  &  gli  altri  poeti  Italiani."  If  the  Im- 
perfect was  in  this  form — ia  (-iva) — at  the  time  of  its  junction 
with  the  Infinitive  to  form  the  Conditional,  there  would  be  no 
further  explanation  necessary  for  the  -rm.^  But  an  observance 
of  imperfects  occurring  in  our  texts  shows  that  forms  in  -ia 
were  exceptional ;  if  the  latter  had  been  the  prevalent  form 
(instead  of  -ea)  his  explanation  would  have  been  accepted  and 
numerous  subsequent  discussions  avoided.    Nor  is  it  to  be  sup- 

^  The  numerals  to  the  right  of  author  mentioned  refer,  as  usual,  to  the 
number  of  times  this  form  occurs  in  the  given  author. 

''And  Castelvetro  in  his  Conditional  gives  Infinitive  with  -ibam,  etc.  Cf. 
Modern  Language  Notes,  vii,  243 :  "  Lebrija  and  the  Romance  Future  Tense  " 
(A.  M.  E). 


ITALIAN   POSSESSIVE   PRONOUNS.  45 

posed  that  avea,  etc.,  when  joined  to  the  Infinitive,  became 
avia,  etc.,  by  analogy  to  Imperfects  of  the  fourth  Conjugation 
(in  -ia),  for  the  number  of  verbs  in  the  latter  is  too  small,  as 
compared  with  those  in  the  other  conjugations,  to  have  exer- 
cised such  an  influence.     D'Ovidio  suggests  ^  that  aveva  being 
a  "voce  servile"  when  joined  to  the  Infinitive  might  have 
undergone  an  alteration  (>  {av)ia)  which  it  did  not  suffer  when 
used  alone ;  in  this  connection  it  is  to  be  remarked  that  the 
majority  of  words  found  under  this  form  of  the  conditional 
{-ria)  in  our  texts  are  words  frequently  used ;  such  as,  saria, 
potria,  avria,  vorria,  dovria,  andena,faria,  vema,  etc.,  which 
would  support  his  suggestion  ;  for,  naturally,  words  most  fre- 
quently used  are  the  first  to  be  affected  by  phonetic  changes, 
and  the  change  from  -rea  to  -ria  may  have  begun  with  these 
vocables.     If  we  admit  that  the  change  thus  took  place,  the 
cause  of  the  variation  is  still  a  question ;  and  until  a  better 
reason  is  offered  the  phenomenon  may  well  be  attributed  to 
the  raising  of  e  to  i  by  hiatus.   Why  then  did  not  the  e  in  the 
syncopated  imperfects,  such  as  avea,  dovea,  facea,  vedea,  etc., 
also  become  i?    The  following  is  offered  as  a  possible  explana- 
tion (which,  as  far  as  I  know,  has  not  hitherto  been  suggested) 
for  this  anomaly,  and  also  helps  to  establish  the  probability  of 
the  raising  of  e  to  i  in  the  Conditional :  in  searching  for  like 
developments  where  e  >  i,  our  attention  is  attracted  to  a  cer- 
tain set  of  words,  now  definitely  fixed  in  form,  which  represent 
the  lost  stage  of  growth  preceding  the  final  development.    These 
words  had  originally  e  +  Vowel,  but  they  now  have  i  -f  Vowel, 
and  for  this  reason  their  development  may  be  compared  with 
that  of  the  Conditional  {-rea  >  -ria) :  Hone  (leonem),  niimo 
(NEC  +  unum),  niente  (nec  +*entem),  and  similar.     Here 
the  regular  products  are  represented  by  neiente  (B13,  El, 
F14),  beiendo  (N),  beiamo  (II),  leiale,  (R),  Tarpeia  (P).     Such 
variants  [that  is,  those  with  an  i  betAveen  e  and  o  (m)]  do  not 
occur   for  Hone,   niuno.      Does   this   not   show   a   difference 

^Arch.  Glot.  It.,  IX,  35. 


46  L.    EMIL    MENGER. 

between  the  quality  of  the  e  (i)  before  o  and  u  and  that  of 
the  e  before  a  and  e,  or  that  there  was  an  uncertainty  in  the 
latter  case  (evidenced  by  the  wa'iting  ei)  which  was  not  felt 
in  the  former?  If  so,  is  not  the  following  suggestion  as  to 
these  words  justifiable?  Before  o  and  u  (leone,  neuno)  e  passes 
directly  to  i,  all  traces  of  the  intervening  consonant  (c)  in  the 
latter  word  being  lost ;  before  a  and  e  uncertainty  prevails 
as  to  the  pronunciation  before  the  adoption  of  the  i ;  this  un- 
certainty is  represented  by  the  writing  of  both  vowels,  ei  (neiente, 
leiale,  beiamo).  Now  where  the  intervening  consonant  definitely 
drops,  the  e  brought  before  e,  a,  developes  into  i  (niente,  Hale)  ; 
where  it  sometimes  disappears  (beanio),  again  does  not  (bevamo), 
the  consciousness  of  use  of  the  consonant  prevents  the  develop- 
ment of  e  >  t  in  the  cases  where  it  is  dropped  [hence  we  have 
beo  (bevo),  creo  [credo),  veo  [veggio],  etc.]. — Now,  if  we  apply 
this  to  the  development  of  the  Imperfect  (aveva)  and  the  Con- 
ditional (avria),  the  v  of  the  former  is  never  forgotten,  and  a 
collection  of  comparative  uses  of  -eva  and  -ea  terminations  in 
our  texts  shows  the  two  side  by  side,  no  author  employing  the 
-ea  to  the  exclusion  of  the  -eva  form.  It  was  not  to  be  expected 
that  e  in  the  latter  (-era)  should  develope  i,  the  only  case  in 
which  it  might  be  expected  to  do  so  being  when  the  v  drops; 
but  the  V  does  not  drop  leaving  -ea  as  the  only  foim,  so  that 
even  when  -ea  is  used,  the  consciousness  of  the  -eva  is  never 
absent  from  the  mind  of  the  speaker  and  prevents  the  develop- 
ment of  -ea  >  -ia  otherwise  to  be  expected,  since  the  speech- 
consciousness  with  reference  to  -ea  was  exactly  the  same  as  that 
of -eva.  It  is  therefore  no  argument  against  this  theory  (namely, 
hiatus  raises  e  >  /)  that  avea,  dovea,  etc.,  do  not  develop  avia, 
dovia,  etc.  But  if  this  v  was  present  to  prevent  said  change 
(-ea  >  -ia)  in  the  Imperfect  when  used  alone,  the  condition  was 
altered  when  the  same  Imperfect,  avea,  was  joined  to  the  In- 
finitive to  form  the  Conditional.  No  Tuscan  text  shows  the 
form  dovreva.     A  few  dialects  may  show  such  forms,^  but  they 

^  Cf.  Grundriss.  i,  544,  ?  103 :   "  Dialekte  bewahren  i  Sg.  noch  rein  :  bresc. 
bol.  portai-eve." 


ITALIAN   POSSESSIVE   PRONOUNS,  47 

were  at  no  time  the  rule,  nor  was  it  natural  that  they  should 
be,  for  such  a  form  was  cumbersome  and  liable  to  reduction. 
It  is  not  claimed,  however,  that  such  Conditionals  (in  -via) 
originated  in  the  Tuscan ;  whatever  may  be  their  source,  the 
fact  still  remains  that  they  are  found  in  Tuscan  only  as  -rea 
and  -ria;  whenever  they  were  introduced  they  were  subject  to 
phonetic  tendencies  already  existing  in  Tuscan,  and  the  })ho- 
netic  trend  that  may  explain  -rea  >  -ria  is  the  raising  of  hiatus 
e  to  i ;  no  traces  of  the  (once)  intervening  v  are  preserved  ;  our 
consciousness  of  its  presence,  if  it  existed,  has  been  lost. — As 
a  resume  we  have :    Conditionals  in  -ria  are  examples  of  the 
raising  of  hiatus  e  {-rea)  to  i  {-ria) ;  the  diflerence  between  its 
development  (>  ia)  and  that  of  similar  forms  with  an  original 
intervening  v  {-eva,  -evo,  etc.)  being,  that  in  the  Conditional  the 
V  was  dropped  early  and  definitely,  in  the  other  cases  it  has 
been  preserved  up  to  the  present  time.     Even  when  it  was 
dropped,  the  consciousness  of  its  presence  in  the  form  allied  to 
it  (with  v)  prevented  the  usual  hiatus  development  of  e  >  i. 
The  fact,  therefore,  that  in  our  texts  words  which,  for  the  most 
part,  have  preserved  their  v  do  sometimes  (after  the  fall  of  the 
v)  develope  e  >  /  is  a  strong  proof  of  the  phonetic  tendency 
just  noted ;  such  words  are  die  {=  dee  =  deve)  and  imperfects 
like  eredia,  avia  (A),  volia  (J),  paria  (Purg.  ii,  18),  solia  (S), 
tenia,  rompia,  paria  (T),  tenia,  sapia  (X),  prendia,  rendia,  volia, 
avia  (DD),  avia,  facia,  eredia,  riprendia  (FF),faeia,  dicia,  avia 
(GG),  etc. ;  in  these  instances,  in  spite  of  the  corresponding 
forms  aveva,  credeva,  etc.,  avea,  credea,  etc.,  show  the  tendency 
to  raise  the  e>  iin  hiatus  and  develope  avia,  eredia,  etc. 

Our  second  question  (Does  hiatus  cause  e  to  become  i)  is, 
then,  answered  in  the  affirmative,  except  for  the  cases  to  be 
considered  in  our  next  question. 

4.     Does  hiatus  prevent  the  development  of  E^ie? 

There  is  no  doubt  as  to  this  development  of  e  when  found 
before  i:  miei,  riei,  liei,  costiei,  siei  (es),  diet  (debes).     The 


K    1*'   "i 


I7BRSlTvl 


48  L.    EMIL    MENGER. 

last  example  (diei)  which  is  <  del  (from  debes),  with  an  origi- 
nal long  E,  seems  to  indicate  that  all  e's  when  brought  before 
i  could  be  treated  as  open  and  diphthongize.  In  the  next 
following  section  of  this  essay  the  same  phenomenon  will  be 
met  with  in  respect  to  hiatus  p  <  u,  which  diphthongizes  before 
i  (nqi'^nuoi,  soi'^suoi);  it  appears,  therefore,  that  for  the 
Italian  no  exception  to  hiatus  rules  need  be  made  for  these 
words,  but  examples  show  that  in  this  language  o  and  e  are 
treated  as  o  and  e  when  before  i.^  Here,  then,  the  Italian 
offers  a  divergence  from  tlie  general  rule  for  such  v^owels  : 
"  Des  voyelles  qui  ne  furent  en  contact  qu'  a  la  suite  de  lois 
phon6tiques  propres  au  latin  vulgaire  conserv&rent  la  nuance 
en  rapport  avec  leur  ancienne  quantite ;  ainsi  on  eut  lUS  de — 
ivus,  siAT  de  sit,  eo  de  ego,"  ^ — the  divergence  being  that 
when  an  i  directly  follows  o  or  e  these  vowels  may  become 
open,  though  they  were  originally  long. 

a.    Does  meus  >  mieo  f 

Is  e  before  o,  g,  o,  diphthongized  as  is  the  case  before  it 
The  Tuscan  texts  show  no  certain  example  of  such  pro- 
cedure. D'Ovidio  (1.  c.)  supposes  diphthongization  in  these 
cases,  and  remarks  that  io^  mio,  dio,  etc.,  are  reductions 
from  ^ieo,  ^niieo,  *dieo,  etc.  As  a  confirmation  of  this 
supposition   he   finds   several   parallel   cases ;   namely,  pria 

<  *priea  <^  piera  <Cpietra;  arria  ■<  *arriea  <<  arrieri ;  hue 

<  huoe  <  BOVEM.  The  first  two  examples  are  not  taken 
from  Tuscan  texts,  and  it  is  to  be  questioned  whether  the 
last  one  is  not  analogical.  In  treating  mio,  hue,  as  reductions 
of  *mieo*buoe,  it  must  be  asked  why  the  plural  miei,  buoi  re- 
tained its  full  form  and  was  not  reduced  to  mii,  bui;  and  if 
these  two,  mii,  bui  (which  do  occur),  are  such  reductions,  why 
was  the  full  form  also  retained  for  the  plural  and  only  the  re- 

"Cf.  p.  57. 

^  Grammaire  des  Langues  Romanes,  par  W.  Meyer-Liibke.     Paris,  1890,  i, 
246,  §  276. 


ITALIAN   POSSESSIVE   PRONOUNS.  49 

duced  form  for  the  singular?  No  explanation  for  this  fact  has 
been  offered,  as  fiir  as  I  am  aware,  and  no  parallel  phenomenon 
exists  in  the  language.  If  *m/eo,*6woe  ever  existed,  the  plurals 
miei,  huoi  would  certainly  have  a  tendency  to  keep  them  on 
account  of  similarity  in  form,  just  as  mii,  dii,  rii,  etc.,  are  formed 
according  to  mio,  dio,  rio,  etc.  This  crossing  of  forms  is  a 
strong  principle  in  the  language  and  has  its  weight  in  a  dis- 
cussion of  the  present  question  (of  the  existence  of  a  *mieo) ; 
for  example,  in  the  present  tense  of  esser-e,  we  find  siete  built 
up  according  to  siei;  siemo,  according  to  siete ;^  in  the  nouns, 
we  find  the  plural  uomi  formed  on  uomo,  and  the  singular 
uomine  on  uominV  On  this  principle,  then,  of  crossing  or 
assimilation  of  singular  and  plural  forms  one  expects  mii  formed 
on  m;io  and  such  a  form  is  found.  On  the  other  hand,  one 
■expects  also  "^mieo  formed  on  miei.  But  the  fact  that  no  such 
form  (*mieo),  if  it  ever  existed,  remained,  although  it  had  this 
principle  of  form  association  (similarity  to  miei)  to  preserve  it, 
is  strong  evidence  of  the  non-existence  of  *mieo  at  any  period 
of  the  Tuscan. 

5.     Do  the  texts  examined  contain  siificient  material  for 

explanations  of  all  forms  studied  loitJiout 

recourse  to  constructive  forms  f 

If  the  statement  of  the  non-existence  of  a  given  form  be 
characterized  as  untenable  since  the  texts  examined  begin  only 
with  the  middle  of  the  thirteenth  century  leaving  unrepre- 
sented the  products  of  the  language  of  the  several  preceding 
centuries  when  the  language  was  in  its  formative  state,  it  may 
be  urged  in  reply  :  I  believe  it  is  better  to  accept  the  expla- 
nation of  a  given  phenomenon  with  what  proof  for  it  may  be 
found  in  existing  products,  than  to  cast  about  for  uncertain 
explanations  based  on  uncertain  (constructive)  forms.  Besides, 
it  is  claimed  in  this  essay  that  the  language  of  the  texts  exara- 

1  Cf.  Meyer-Liibke,  It.  Or.,  |  447.  'Ibid.,  I  339. 

4 


60  L.    EMIL    MENGER. 

ined  contains  sufficient  material  for  the  explanation  of  all  the 
forms  studied  ;  if  this  material  agrees  with  that  which  proba- 
bly existed  in  the  postulated  language  of  the  three  or  four 
centuries  preceding  these  texts^  so  much  the  better ;  if  not,  it 
must  be  accepted  as  our  norm  until  more  is  known  regarding 
the  possible  developments  of  said  postulated  speech.  It  is  a 
fact  that  where  a  number  of  varying  forms  of  one  and  the 
same  word  has  been  iound,  it  has  been  possible,  for  the  most 
part,  to  establish  a  logical  connection  between  these  different 
forms,  to  discover  which  was  the  oldest,  which  the  intermediate 
growth  that  preceded  the  final  resultant  form  now  found  in  the 
modern  language.  Thus,  for  the  Conditional  we  have  avea 
-avrea  -avria,  for  the  explanation  of  which  {avria)  there  is  no 
need  of  an  intermediate  borrowed  form  ;  in  the  next  section 
I  shall  show  that  the  texts  indicate  like  conclusions  for  the 
second  possessive  pronoun,  Tui  -toi  -tuoi,  where  the  last  form 
is  the  outgrowth  of  the  first  two  ;  similarly,  in  products  where 
only  two  stages  are  represented  it  is  reasonable  to  explain  for 
the  most  part  the  second  as  the  outgrowth  of  the  first. 

Applying  these  remarks  to  the  case  in  hand,  we  find  eo,  io; 
meo,  mio  ;  deo,  dio  ;  reo,  rio — mea,  mia  ;  mee,  mie,  etc,  with  no 
probable  intermediate  stage  ^  to  indicate  that  they  ever  existed 
as  diphthongized  forms  in  the  Tuscan.  Under  our  second 
question  it  was  show^n  to  be  probable  that  hiatus  can  raise  e  > 
i  ;  we  find  here  forms  with  e,  again  with  i,  and  the  conclusion 
naturally  follows  that  these  words  also  are  illustrations  of  the 
principle  of  hiatus  e  >  i;  thus  understood,  there  is  no  necessity 

^  The  form  miV  has  been  noted  as  occurring  in  the  Tavola  Rhonda  in  the- 
expression  per  mie^fe,  where  it  was  supposed  to  be  equivalent  to  an  old  ^iniea. 
It  is  a  curious  fact  that  the  same  locution  occurs  several  times  in  Cellini. 
Now  it  is  not  to  be  supposed  that  the  latter  had  any  idea  of  an  old  ^miea 
when  he  used  mie',  for  two  hundred  and  fifty  years  had  elapsed  since  the 
writing  of  the  Tavola  and  the  form  had  disappeared  in  the  meantime.  But 
there  is  a  fact  that  may  account  for  its  use  by  both,  without  supposing  it 
equivalent  to  *miea ;  that  is,  both  were  French  imitations.  Cellini  often 
uses  French  expressions;  why  these  authors  supposed  this  mie'  (=  mia)  to  be- 
the  Italian  equivalent  of  the  French  possessive,  however,  is  not  apparent. 


ITALIAN    POSSESSIVE   PRONOUNS.  51 

for  supposing  an  Intermediate  "^mieo,  or  any  similar  constructive 
form.  It  was  stated  above  that  the  Tuscan  dislikes  such  a  form 
as  *mieo  (cf.  p.  49).  If  the  pronoun  is  supposed  to  have  ex- 
isted under  this  form,  it  constitutes  an  exception  to  the  develop- 
ment to  be  expected,  for  the  e  in  meum  in  Vulg.  Lat.  is  long.^ 
But  if  mio  is  taken  as  from  meo,  it  agrees  with  the  development 
of  dee  (debet)  >  die,  described  above,  and  no  exception  need 
be  made  for  it,  nor  for  the  similar  dio,  rio,  etc. 

The  answer  to  the  third  question  (Does  hiatus  prevent  the 
development  of  e  >  ie)  is  represented  in  resume  by  the  follow- 
ing statement :  When  the  e  is  before  i  it  diphthongizes  even 
if  from  an  original  e  ;  but  before  a,  e,  o,  the  treatment  is  the 
same  as  that  noted  under  3  (p.  42),  that  is  e  >  i. 

6.     Conclusions. 

1.  Latin  i  and  i  occurring  in  Tuscan  in  hiatus  position  are 
both  retained  ;  no  example  where  the  latter  (i)  has  given  e  has 
been  found  in  hiatus  :   *THiUM>2io;  PlUM>j3io. 

2.  e  and  e  in  Tuscan,  before  i  give  the  same  result,  -ie,  the 
e  being  treated  as  e  in  hiatus  before  this  vowel  (i) ;  both  are 
diphthongized  :  debes  >  del  >  diei;  mei  >  miei. 

3.  e  before  the  other  vowels  {a,  e,  o)  is  close  and  hence 
never  diphthongizes,  but  is  raised  to  i  in  hiatus :  dee  >  die; 
meo  >  mio. 


It  was  my  original  intention  to  give  here  all  words  in  the 
language  in  which  hiatus  e  or  /  occurs,  in  positions  other  than 
those  considered  above.  Such  has  been  done  for  hiatus  o  and 
u  (cf.  p.  65) ;  but  the  number  of  these  words  amounts  to  nearly 
four  thousand,  and  lack  of  space  does  not  permit  their  being 
printed  here.  My  plan  was  to  arrange  them  according  to  the 
system  followed  for  hiatus  u  and  o  (p.  65) :  those  with  i  cor- 
responding to  the  latter  in  u,  those  with  e  corresponding  to 

'  Cf.  Meyer-Liibke,  Gr.  d.  Langues  Rom.,  I,  §  276 :    "  Ie  singulier  meus  se 
regie  sur  Ie  pluriel  mei." 


62  L.    EMIL    MENGER. 

the  latter  in  o.  As  u  +  Vowel  is  the  rule,  so  is  i  +  Vowel  in 
all  positions,  and  the  proportional  relations  of  the  two  sets 
are — e  -|- Vowel :  i-f  Vowel  =  o+ Vowel :  u  -|- Vowel.  Words 
with  e  +  Vowel  are  mostly  "  mots  savants  "  or  borrowed.  The 
list  of  this  set  (e  +  Vowel)  is  swelled  by  numbers  of  terms  that 
belong  to  special  professions ;  as,  medicine  or  law,  or  special 
sciences.  These  terms,  of  course,  never  underwent  popular 
phonetic  development. — Opportunity  may  offer  to  publish 
these  lists  at  some  time  in  the  future. 


B.     Tonic  U  in  HIA.tds;  tuo ;  tuoi;  suo;  suoi. 

1.     Previous  explonations. 

Several  explanations  have  been  offered  as  to  the  develo{)ment 
of  tuoi,  suoi.  One  is  that  quoted  (p.  58)  from  Meyer-Liibke:* 
"  duoi  et  suoi  *  *  *  *  pourraient  reposer  sur  duos,  suos." 
Phonetically  this  would  be  regular,  according  to  the  principle 
announced  by  d'Ovidio  :  ^  "  Im  Auslaute  verstummt  s,  ent- 
wickelt  aber  nach  betonten  Vokalen  ein  i:  dai,  assai,  noi,  poi." 
But  there  are  two  grave  objections  to  tuoi  <  tdos,  suoi  <  suos. 
The  first  is,  that  to  suppose  the  Italian  forms  derived  from  the 
Latin  accusative  is  contrary  to  the  law  of  preservation  of  the 
Latin  accusative  plural  in  other  instances,  notably  in  nouns. 
Cf.  Meyer-Liibke  :  ^  "  Der  Nominativ  pluralis  der  ersten  uud 
zweiten  lateinischen  Deklination  ist  geblieben  :  -e  kann  nur  auf 

^CrT.  d.  Lang.  Rom.,  I,  ^  276. 

^Gi-undriss,  I,  532,  ?  7.4.     Cf.  Meyer-Lubke,  It.  Gr.,  ?  270. 

^II.  Or.,  §  321.  I  have  taken  the  liberty  here  of  correcting  this  section  as 
it  reads  in  Meyer-Liibke' s  Grammatik  ;  it  stands  there :  "  -e  kann  nur  auf  -ae, 
-i  auf  -A  zuriickgehen,  da  -AS  zu  -e,  -OS  zu  -o  geworden  ware."  "  -;'  auf  -A  "  is 
incorrect  since  the  Nom.  Plu.  of  the  second  Lat.  Decl.  in  -i  is  referred  to,  and 
the  meaning  is  evident :  just  as  -ae  (of  the  first  Decl.)  >-e,  so  -i  (of  the  second 
Decl.)  >-!•;  "  da  -as  zu  -e  "  evidently  does  not  express  the  author's  meaning, 
for  if  -AE  >  -e  and  -as  >  -e  this  would  not  show  in  itself  whether  the  Ace.  or 
Nom.  of  the  Latin  was  preserved  in  Italian.  But  -as  >-t  regularly ;  cf.  Hid., 
I  106,  AMAS>-es>-i. 


ITALIAN    POSSESSIVE   PRONOUNS.  68 

-AE,  -i  aiif  -I  zuriickgehen,  da  -AS  zii  i,  -OS  zu  -o  geworden 
ware.  In  den  andern  Klassen  sind  Norainativ  nnd  Accusativ 
gleichlautend,  komraen  also  niclit  weiter  in  Betracht."  Tuus, 
suus  were  declined  according  to  the  second  Lat.  Decl.,  and  here, 
as  with  nouns,  we  expect  the  Latin  Nominative  Plural — tui, 
sui — to  be  preserved  in  Italian,  and  not  the  Accusative  tuos, 
suos. — Again,  a  fact  points  still  more  strongly  against  the 
derivation  of  tuoi,  suoi  from  the  Latin  Accusative  in  that  the 
possessive  pronoun  of  the  first  person  (miei)  can  come  only 
from  the  Latin  Nominative  Plural  mei;  meus  was  likewise 
declined  according  to  the  second  Latin  declension,  and  it  would 
be  inconsistent  to  maintain  that  met  was  preserved  in  one  case, 
while  TUOS,  suos  were  kept  in  the  other. — We  have  another 
objection  in  that  the  derivation  of  tuoi,  suoi  from  tuos,  suos 
would  make  triphthongs  of  the  Italian  forms,  the  i  <  s  count- 
ing as  a  syllable  (cf.  assai,  piui-  plus).  Khymes  gathered 
from  any  Italian  poet  would  prove  this  to  be  impossible, 
since  tuoi,  suoi  always  count  as  two  syllables,  and,  if  they 
were  triphthongs,  they  could  not  be  made  to  rhyme  with 
noi,  voi,  etc.,  which  rhymes  are  of  frequent  occurrence.  For 
example,  in  Cino  da  Pistoja,  in  the  strophe  preceding  that 
quoted  (p.  57)  are  the  lines : 

"  In  quelle  parti,  che  furon  gia  suoi, 
Quando  trova  il  Signor  parlar  di  voi." 

P.  D.  Bartoli  observes  with  reference  to  vuo'^=vuoi:^  "Questo 
vuo'  per  vuoi  cui  non  v'e  chi  contradica  come  mal  accorciato, 
mi  ricorda  I'insegnarsi  da  alcuni  vuoi,  suoi,  tuoi,  miei,  esser 
Trittonghi ;  il  che  se  fosse,  come  potrebbono  accorciarsi  piu 
de'  Dittonghi,  de'  quali  confessano  non  potersi?  E  pur  tutto 
di  scriviamo,  e  bene,  tu  vuo\  i  suo',  a'  mie\  Oltre  di  cio,  se 
fosser  trittonghi,  non  potrebbon  farsi  due  sillabe  come  pur  gli 
ha  tante  volte  il  Petrarca  in  rima  con  noi,  voi,  poi:  e  miei  eon 
lei,  dei,  vorrd. — Ben  puo  il  verso  restrignere  le  lor  due  sillabe 

^  DdP  Ortografia  Ilaliana.     Koma,  1670,  p.  101. 


54  r..    EMIL    MENGER. 

in  una,  ma  senza  pregiudicio  del  poterle  usare  ancora  per  quelle 
due  sillabe  che  pur  sono :  e  se  due  sillabe  adunque  non  un 
trittongo." 

A  second  explanation  of  tuoi,  suoi  is  that  given  by  Diez  :  ^ 
*'  Der  diphthongierte  plural  miei  weckte  den  Diphthong  auch 
in  iuoi,  suoi,  der  eigentlich  nicht  regelrecht  ist."  Just  above 
this  he  observes  :  "  Die  nach  mio  geformten  tio  und  do  finden 
sich." — If  the  singular,  formed  on  mio,  is  tio,  sio,  would  not 
the  plural  formed  on  miei  be  similarly  tiei,  sieif 

We  have  a  third  explanation  by  Korting  :  ^  "Abnorm  sind 
die  Pluralbildungen  tuoi,  suoi;  vermuthlich  sind  sie  aus  Sg. 
tuo,  suo,  durch  Anfiigung  eines  i  nach  Analogic  der  substan- 
tivischen  Plurale  auf  -i  enstanden." — An  analogy  such  as  is 
here  noted  is  impossible,  since  the  plural  of  masculine  sub- 
stantives in  -0  is  formed  by  replacing  the  -o  by  an  -i.  One 
does  not  decline  amico — ^amicoi,  but  amico — amid.  On  the 
same  principle  a  plural  formed  on  the  singular  tuo,  suo,  would 
be  tui,  sui ;  the  latter  forms  do  occur  and  are  possibly  con- 
structed in  this  way.  Furthermore,  if  such  an  explanation 
as  this  were  accepted,  we  should  have  to  explain  also  why 
mio  did  not  give  *mioi  just  as  tuo  >•  tuoi. 

An  explanation  of  tuoi,  suoi  which  is  based  on  a  study  of 
the  history  of  hiatus  u  will  now  be  attempted. 

2.      Uses  in  texts  consulted. 

• 
We  find  in  Latin  Tin,  sui ;  in  Italian  tui,  sui;  toi,  soi;  tuoi, 

suoi.  The  first  two  {tui,  sui ;  toi,  soi)  are  used  only  sporadi- 
cally, the  last  {tuoi,  suoi)  prevail  as  the  regular  developments 
from  the  Latin.  If  we  consider  the  three  difiPerent  forms,  what 
were  the  successive  stages  of  development  that  culminated  in 
tuoi,  suoi  f 

In  our  texts  we  observe  the  following  uses  :  ^ 

1  Qram.  \\\  90.  *  Encyc.  iii,  652. 

'<Mo',  sMo';  i\iot,  suae  are  given  above  (p.  16). 


ITALIAN    POSSESSIVE   PRONOUNS.  55 

tuoi,  suoi:  A,  B,  C,  D,  F,  H,  I,  J,  K,  L,  M,  N,  O,  P,  R,  S, 
T,  U,  V,  X,  Y,  Z,  AA,  BB,  CC,  DD,  EE,  FF,  GG,  II,  LL, 

eg   'p'p 

L,  sue:  B,  C,  F,  G.  H,  I,  J,  K,  M,  N,  O,  P,  T,V,  X,  Y, 
Z,  AA,  BB,  CC,  DD,  EE,  FF,  GG,  II,  LL,  SS,  TT. 
duoi:  L,  N,  T,V,  EE,  GG,  LL,  OO. 
due:  B,  F,  G,  H,  1,  J,  K,  M,  N,  O,  T,V,  X,  BB,  EE,  GG, 

LL,  oo. 

soi:  G,  I,  J,  L,  O,  P,  T,V,  X,  GG,  NN. 

toi:  P,  T,V,  X,  LL,  MM. 

doi:  L,  N,  T,  X,  EE,  LL,  SS. 

sui:  C,  K,  N,  O,  P,V,  X,  FF,  KK,  NN,  SS. 

tui:  P,V,  FF,  GG. 

dui:  1,  N,  T,V,  X,  Y,  BB,  KK,  LL,  SS. 

muoi  (==  Mc3vEs)  :  P. 

puoi  {=  POTES) :  F,  I,  J,  K,  O,  P,  S,  V,  W,  X,  Z,  CC,  EE, 

FF,  GG,  LL,  SS. 

puoi  (=  POST) :  G,  J,  K,  P,  T,  V. 

^uoi  {=  VOLES) :  P,  S,  T,  Y,  W,  X,  Z,  BB,  EE,  FF,  LL, 

SS 

buoi  (=  BOVES) :  H,  P,  V,  X,  GG. 

nuoi  (=  Nos) :  P,  V. 

vuoi  {=  vos)  :  P,  EE,  GG. 

moi  {=  moves)  :  P. 

poi(=  POTES):  P,T,V,X,IL 

vol  (=  VOLES) :  P,  I,  V,  X,  EE,  GG,  II,  LL. 

boi  1=  BOVEs) :  P,  T,  X. 

nui  (=  NOS) :  C,  P,  V,  GG,  LL,  NN,  SS. 

^i  (=  vos) :  C,  O,  P,  T,  X,  LL,  NN,  SS. 

bui  (=  b6ves)  :  X,  BB,  KK. 

toa,  soa :  P,  T,  X. 
toe:  V. 

soe:  T,V,  X,  GG. 
■doe:  L,  T. 


66  L.    EMIL    MENGER. 

3.     Development  of  toi,  soi. 

The  latter  part  of  Meyer-Liibke's  rule  quoted  (p.  32)  is  of 
no  assistance  here  :  "  Ebenso  haben  wir  nur  u  und  uo  bei  den 
velaren  Vokalen  :  fui,  cui,  grue,  due,  tuo,  tua,  tuoi,  hue,  altrui." 
— Caix  observes  :  ^  "  u  (tonico)  diviene  o  come  nell'  uso  gen- 
erale  romanzo  :  eroce,  giovane,  sopra.  Ma  grande  divergenza 
e  nei  riflessi  dei  bisillabi  suus,  tuus,  duo,  fui.  Da  una  parte 
la  tendenza  al  suono  chiuso  da  tuo,  due, — in  corrispondenza  con 
mio,  dio  ;  dalP  altra  la  preferanza  pel  suono  aperto  da  ^o  (too), 
so  (sod),  doe,foi, — in  corrispondenza  con  meo,  deo,  eo.  Dove 
cioe  prevale  la  formula  e"'  si  preferisce  o",  e  dove  prevale  i"  si 
preferisce  u".  Anche  qui  e  da  avvertire  che  le  due  formule 
erano  largamente  diffuse,  ma  che  la  formula  con  o  pare  essere 
stata  la  piu  generale. — Ma  nel  siciliano,  e  nella  gran  maggio- 
ranza  dei  mss.  toscani  la  formula  con  u  e  la  sola  in  uso. 
Tantoche  si  dice,  per  la  stessa  tendenza  non  solo  suo,  tuo,  ecc, 
ma  anche  bue  (==  bove)." 

We  thus  have  in  toi,  soi  ''  la  preferanza  pel  suono  aperto." 
This  phenomenon  is  encountered  in  Proven9al,^  where  we 
know  it  is  directly  from  tui,  sui,  for  the  oblique  forms,  tens, 
seus  ( <  Tuos,  suos)  also  exist. 

As  to  how  this  toi,  soi  developed  from  tui,  sui,  a  compari- 
son with  the  corresponding  forms  in  French  may  give  us  some 
light.  Neumann  remarks  with  reference  to  o:^  "Im  Latein- 
ischen  existirt  neben  einander  novus  und  D:fiNuo  (aus  denovo) 
ersteres  die  betonte, — nuo  in  letzerem  die  in  unbetontem  Zu- 
stande  entwickelte  Form  desselbeu  Wortes.  Auch  fur  das  Pron. 
poss.  (tuum  und  suum)  wird  es  im  Lat.  zwei  verschiedene  For- 
men,  je  nachdem  es  betont  oder  unbetont  war,  gegeben  haben. 
Nach  dem  Klass.  Lat.  Muster  novus — d6nuo  werden  die- 
selben  gewesen  sein  *t6vum,  *s6vum,  tuum,  suum."^ — This 

'  Origini,  §  55.  *  Grundriss,  I,  626,  ^  65. 

3  Literaturblatt,  1882,  col.  468. 

*Cf.  Schwan,  Grammatik  des  Altframosischen.  2te  Aufl.  Leipzig,  1893. 
U  21,  2 ;  33,  2  and  409,  3. 


ITALIAN    POSSESSIVE   PRONOUNS.  57 

observation  is  made  in  explanation  of  the  Old  French  tuen, 
suen,  where  the  6  before  u  (by  fall  of  the  r)  >  o  and  diph- 
thongizes. Might  not  Italian  toi,  soi  have  similarly  derived 
from  *TOVi,  *s6vi?  A  seeming  corroboration  of  this  suppo- 
sition is  the  fact  that  in  T  bovi  and  boi  exist  side  by  side. 

Whether  it  was  through  the  medium  of  a  *tovi,  *sovi  or  not, 
the  development  of  u  >  o  in  hiatus  as  well  as  before  conso- 
nants is  not  difficult  of  comprehension,  for  the  use  of  the  two 
[u  and  o)  by  the  early  poets  shows  that  there  must  have  been 
a  marked  resemblance  in  the  phonetic  value  of  these  vowels. 
On  this  point  is  the  testimony  of  Celso  Cittadini  who  observes 
in  regard  to  u  >  o  :  ^  "  Non  essendo  veramente  u  altro  che  un 
o,  o  si  pur  simigliantissimo  ad  esso,  la  onde  appo  i  nostri  antichi 
rimatori  era  fatto  rimar  con  o,  facendo,  per  caso,  risponder  lui 
a  voi,  lume  a  nome;  e  simili  altri  come  in  particolar  leggiamo 
appo  Dante  Alighieri  nel  sonetto  che  incomincia  '  L'anima 


mia :' 


"  Dicendo  :  io  voglio  Amor  cio  che  tu  i>uoi, 
E  piange  entro  quell'hor,  pregando  lui."  * 

E  cosi  nel  sonetto  '  Piet^  e  raerce'  fa  rimar:  colui:  voi:  poi, 
E  Guido  Cavalcanti  nella  sua  nobil  Canzone  d'Amore:  come: 
nome:  costume." — Similar  rhymes  may  be  found  in  GG,  fo.  h  : 
lui :  fui :  suoi. 

4.     0  before  i  >  p  and  diphthongizes. 

Were  tuoi,  suoi  developed  directly  from  toi,  soif  The  ex- 
amples, as  given  above,  go  to  show  this  to  be  the  case.  Such 
a  statement,  of  course,  seems  directly  contrary  to  acknowledged 
hiatus  laws,  because  in  toi,  sqi  the  o  is  close  and  as  such  could 
not  diphthongize,  and  Meyer-Liibke  ^  regards  this  vowel  de- 
velopment as  an  exception,  since  after  giving  the  law  [e  +  i  >- 

^  Origini  delta  volgar  Toscana  favella      Siena,  1604,  p.  16. 
'  I  had  noted  the  same  example  in  C,  where  it  is  placed  among  the  rhymes 
of  Cino  da  Pistoja. 

3  Gr.  d.  Lang.  Rom.  I,  §  276. 


58  L.    EMIL    MENaER. 

€,  H-A>e;  6  +  u>p,  +A,  i>o  (w)]  he  observes  :  "  Mais 
ces  lois  ont  ete  troubl^es  deja  dans  le  Latin  vulgaire  :  le  singu- 
lier  MEUS  se  regie  siir  le  pluriel  MEi,  et  le  pluriel  soi  sur  le 
singulier  sous."  From  this  remark  one  might  suppose  that 
the  writer  holds  suoi  to  be  <  soi,  but  he  evidently  does  not 
consider  the  form  thus  developed,  since  (1.  c.  §  279)  he  remarks: 
"  Nous  avons  pour  u  du  latin  vulgaire  DUAS,  SUAS,  ital.  due, 
sua;  duoi  et  suoi  sont  douteux  puisqu'ils  pourraient  reposer 
sur  DUOS,  suos."  But  this  exception  for  toi,  soi  does  not  cover 
all  the  words  which  we  have  noted  with  uo  before  i,  notably 
nuoi,  vuoi  {=  noi,  voi  =  nos,  vos)  ;  and  the  fact  seems  to  be 
that  when  o  occurs  before  i,  whether  after  the  fall  of  a  V 
(*TOVi,  *sovr)  or  not  (noi,  voi),  it  becomes  open  and  diph- 
thongizes.^ A  safer  statement  than  this  one  would  be:  nuoi 
and  vuoi  are  exceptional  forms,  and,  after  accepting  the  expla- 
nation of  the  p  in  soi  as  given  above,  we  have  all  words  in  this 
category  with  an  o, — soi,  toi  (analogically) ;  ppi  (potes),  poi 
(post),  voi  (voles),  boi  (hdves)  have  original  p;  nothing,  there- 
fore, hinders  here  the  diphthongization.  Perhaps  the  writers 
who  used  nuoi,  vuoi,  employed  them  along  with  noi,  voi,  just 
as  they  did  toi,  tuoi;  soi,  suoi.  While  such  explanations  of  the 
irregularity  (-o  >  -uo)  may  be  safer,  yet  it  is  claimed  in  this 
monograph  that  there  is  sufficient  evidence  to  make  it  very 
probable  that  p  and  e  before  i  diphthongize  regularly. 

5.     Influence  of  v  element. 

What  part  did  v  play  in  the  development  of  the  words  in- 
dicated ;  and  where  o  -f-  v  +  i  occurred,  did  the  O  diphthongize 
before  or  after  the  fall  of  the  v?  On  this  point  evidence 'seems 
to  be  contradictory.  D'Ovidio  observes  :  ^  "  Auch  im  Hiat 
blieb  der  betonte  Vokal  nicht  unverandert.  Die  Yergleichung 
mit  anderen  romanischen  Sprachen  und  ital.  Dialekten  lehrt, 

^Cf.  above  p.  48,  where  the  example  of  diei  (=  dei  =  Df^BEs)  seems  to 
indicate  that  e  also  (before  i)  becomes  open  and  diphthongizes. 
*  Grundriss,  I,  525,  §  52. 


ITALIAN    POSSESSIVE    PRONOUNS.  59 

das  mio,  hue  einst  *mieo,  *buoe  lauteten.  Jene  schon  vulgar- 
lateinisclien  *mieo,  *buoe  erlitten  nun  die  verschiedensten 
Schicksale;  bald  wurden  beide  vereinfacht,  wie  im  Toskan- 
ischen,  jedoch  nur  im  Singular." 

Did  not  the  -ilo  develop  from  bove  >*buove  >*buoe  > 
buef  To  suppose  that  the  v  fell  and  the  o  >  i*  on  account  of 
hiatus  would  be  contrary  to  what  we  find  in  Old  French  buef, 
Spanish  huey,  Proven9al  buous.  Similarly  in  the  plural,  Was 
not  the  development  boves  >  bovi  >  buovi  >  buoi  f  Such  a 
form,  buovi,  is  recorded.^  If  the  v  fell  before  this  develo])ment 
of -O  (>  -uo),  the  latter  (according  to  hiatus  law  quoted  above, 
p.  58)  would  become  o,  and  we  would  not  expect  it  to  diph- 
thongize. But  on  the  supposition  that  the  diphthongization  of 
noi,  vgi  >  nuoi,  vuoi  is  original  (not  analogical  to  tuoi, suoi),  there 
is  no  reason  why  boi  should  not  have  a  similar  development. 

If  now  a  V-  stage  may  be  supposed  for  all  the  -words  under 
consideration  the  toi,  soi,  boi  can  be  treated  as  further  reduc- 
tions :  thus  *t6vi  >  *TUOVi  >  tuoi  >  toi  (and  soi,  boi  in  like 
manner).  But  this  supposition  is  untenable  ;  the  word  puoi  < 
poi  <  POST  shows  the  contrary  to  be  the  case ;  there  is  no  pos- 
sibility that  any  phonetic  element  was  ever  introduced  between 
the  0  and  i  iiere ;  the  o  =  original  o.  Of  the  two  forms  poi  and 
puoi  there  is  no  question  as  to  the  po?'  being  the  original  one 
and  this  seems  to  point  to  a  similar  development  of  tuoi,  suoi  < 
toi,  soi  (not  <  *TUOVi,  *suovi).^  The  conclusion,  then,  as  to 
V  is  :  There  is  evidence  of  the  development  of  6  >  mo  before 
v  and  that  the  V  afterward  fell  {buovi  >  buoi)  ;  but,  taking  this 
word,  the  form  boi  cannot  be  supposed  as  a  further  reduction 
from  buoi  because  a  comparison  with  puoi  <  poi  <  post,  where 
poi  is  the  immediate  background  of  puoi,  shows  that  boi  also 
probably  preceded  buoi.     Again  :  buovi  occurs^  and  cannot  be 

^Zeitschrift  fiir  Rom.  Phil.,  ix,  542. 

»In  FF,  p.  125,  is  found  suoli  (soles)  ;  in  BB,  pp.  34  and  60,  occurs  toi 
(tolles) — these  forms  are  mentioned  for  comparison. 

3  Cf.  in  P  voli  (voles)  Inf.  xxix,  34 ;  suoli  (soles)  Inf.  iv,  6 ;  duoli  (doles) 
Inf.  XXI,  44. 


60  L.    EMIL    MENGER. 

disregarded  ;  we  must,  then,  if  we  maintain  the  priority  of  boi 
and  acknowledging  buovi,  admit  a  parallel  development  of  two 
forms  from  the  Latin,  both  resulting  in  the  same  product  {buoi) 

in  Italian.     Thus  boves  >  bovi  >      .^*  >  >  buoi. 

'  boi     ) 

6.     o  before  a,  e,  o  "^  u. 

How  does  the  development  of  the  singular  bue  compare  with 

that  of  the  plural  just  described  ?     Is  the  process  here:  bovem 

oitovs  I  Olios  I 

>  bove  <  r  >  /,     s     /■  >  buef    Another  question  arises 

boe      }       {boe)    J 

here  :  Does  o  before  e  diphthongize  [boey-  *buoe)  after  the  fall  of 

the  V  (both  forms  *buoe<^*buove  and  *buoe<^boe  being  reduced 

afterward  to  bue),  or  is  the  o  raised  to  u  by  hiatus  before  e  f 

This  is  difficult  to  answer  from  the  fact  that  examples  of  buove 

and  boe  have  not  been  found.^     But  there  is  no  reason  why  bove 

should  not  have  given  "^buove  ^*buoe^  bue,  so  that  we  have  to 

consider  only  bue  <  boe.     From  a  comparison  with  words  of 

similar  development  we  observe  the  following :  boa,  canoa,  eroe 

have  kept  o ;   bua,  jprua  have  developed  o  >  w.     Boa  is  a 

zoological  term;  canoa  is  spoken  of  by  Scheler^  as  follows: 

"  Les  mots  esp.  et  it.  canoa,  angl.  canoe  sont  tires  de  candoa 

de  la  langue  des  Caraibes  ;  "  eroe  is  <  heroem  ;  bua  is  <  b5o 

— are  ;  ^  prua  is  <  *prodam.*    The  appropriate  form  here  is 

bua  <  BO-,  and  it  furnishes  a  parallel  for  the  raising  of  o  >  u 

in  hiatus.    For  boe  ^*buoe  there  is  no  parallel.    Examples  of 

tuoe,  suoe  have  been  given  above,^  but  they  are  easily  explained 

as  analogous  to  the  masculine  tuoi,  suoi;  that  is,  a  full  feminine 

form  tuoe,  suoe  was  constructed  to  correspond  to  the  masculine 

^bue  occurs  in  T,  X,  GG,  II,  LL;  bove  in  T,  X;  60  in  LL  (p.  184:  che 
come  il  bo  la  notte  voi  facciate). 

^Dict.  d'Et.  Fr.,  p.  86:  canot. 

^Korting,  Lateinisch-romanisches  Worterbuch.  Paderborn,  1891.  col.  127, 
no.  1288. 

*And  is  Genoese.    Meyer-Liibke,  It.  Or.,  p.  42,  ?  59. 

s  Cf.  p.  16. 


ITALIAN   POSSESSIVE    PRONOUNS.  61 

tuoi,  suoi.     For  the  singular,  therefore,  as  for  the  plural,  bue 
may  be  the  result  of  two  forms,  *buoe  or  boe  ;  bf)ve  >  >  > 

uUOS  1 

{boe)  J 

The  final  application  of  this  example  to  the  development 
of  tuoi,  suoi  is  as  follows :  First,  it  shows  the  varying  treat- 
ment of  o  according  as  it  occurs  before  i  or  e,  giving  -uo  {buoi) 
in  the  first  case,  being  raised  to  u  (bue)  in  the  second  ;  secondly, 
it  shows  that  toi,  soi  must  have  preceded  tuoi,  suoi,  just  as  boi, 
poi  preceded  buoi,  puoi ;  the  form  puoi  <  poi  <  post  where 
no  product  like  *puovi  is  possible,  shows  that  the  development 
of  tuoi  <  toi  and  of  suoi  <  soi  may  be  independent  of  *tovi, 
*s6vi ;  the  non-occurrence  of  iuovi,  suovi  indicates  the  same 
thing.  The  development  of  nqi,  vgi  >  nuoi,  vuoi  from  a  close 
vowel  (o)  evidences  a  strong  tendency  to  diphthongization  when 
o  occurred  before  i,  so  that  the  preferable  development  of  tuoi, 
suoi  would  seem  to  be  :  tui  >  toi  >  tuoi  ;  stri  >  soi  >  suoi. 
The  forms  toi,  soi  as  existing  to-day  in  dialects  of  North  Italy 
have  morphologically  a  close  o,  whether  they  come  directly 
from  TUI,  sui,  or  from  *t6vi,  *s6vi,^  so  that  for  their  further 
development  into  -uo  in  Tuscan  it  may  be  necessary  to  accept 
the  exception  noted  above  (p.  58)  "  le  pluriel  soi  se  regie  sur 
le  singulier  sous." 

a.     tui,  bui,  nui,  etc. 

All  of  this  points  very  clearly  toward  tOi  >  toi  >  tuoi,  and 
this  development  destroys  the  likelihood  that  toi  is  a  reduction 
of  tuoi,  a  suggestion  by  d'Ovidio  :  ^  "  il  tai,  soi  in  quanto  si  trovi 
in  testi  italiaui,  di  qualunque  regione,  e  proprio  certo  che  metta 
capo  a  tui,  o  non  piuttosto  a  tuoi  tuos?  "     The  forms  poi — 

^In  N  (p.  2)  occurs  Id  due  {=la  dove).  Here  the  process  was  probablj 
dove  >  doe  >  due. 

*  For  in  the  latter  case,  after  the  fall  of  the  v,  the  6  >  o.  Cf.  Hiatus  law, 
p.  58. 

^  Archiv.  Glot.  ltd.,  IX,  44,  note  1. 


OP  a: 


62  L.    EMIL    MENGER, 

puoi  cited  above  show  which  was  the  original ;  also  according 
to  the  development  ^  of  *buoe  >  bue,  a  reduced  form  of  tuoi 
would  be  tui.  This  leads  to  the  question  as  to  what  these 
forms,  tui,  sui,  dui,  nui,  vui,  bui,  are.  The  quotation  cited  from 
Zehle  (p.  29)  was  to  the  effect  that  tui,  sui  are  Latinisms  in 
Dante  ;  again  a  suggestion  has  been  made  that  they  are  plurals 
formed  on  the  singular  tuo,  suo  by  changing  -o  >  -i,  the  usual 
manner  of  forming  plurals  of  substantives  in  -o  (p.  54). 
D'Ovidio  remarks  :  ^  "  In  tui,  sui,  ace.  a  tuoi,  suoi  =  Tv6s,  suos, 
non  so  se  s'abbiano  a  vedere  degli  assottigliamenti  fonetici,  o 
delle  coutinuazioni  populari  delle  forme  nominativali  latine, 
o  meri  latinismi,  o  mere  formazioni  fatte  sui  sing,  tuo,  ecc, 
com'  e  mii."  The  six  words  just  mentioned  (tui,  sui,  nui,  bui, 
vui,  dui)  have  been  treated  under  other  forms  (as  toi,  tuoi,  voi, 
vuoi,  etc.)  as  parallels  in  development ;  this  would  indicate  that 
in  their  treatment  under  this  form  (-ui)  all  should  in  like 
manner  be  classed  together,  and  if  they  are  thus  considered, 
no  one  of  the  explanations  suggested  up  to  the  present  time 
will  account  for  all  these  forms,  but  only  for  tui,  sui,  dui. 
Nui,  vui,  bui  cannot  be  latinisms,  they  cannot  be  plurals  formed 
on  a  singular  *7iuo,  *vuo,  "^buo  ;  it  is  hardly  probable  that  by 
a  phonetic  reduction  from  tuoi,  etc.,  the  unaccented  vowel  u 
should  have  been  preserved,  nor  would  this  explain  7iui,  vui, 
since  nuoi,  vuoi  are  rare  forms.  Granted  the  explanation  as 
noted  below  for  such  products,  they  all  fall  under  a  like  treat- 
ment and  also  agree  with  the  development  of  their  fuller  forms, 
tuoi,  etc.  According  to  the  law  for  hiatus  (cf.  p.  58),  6  +  i 
>  0  or  11 ;  in  looking  upon  the  u  in  tui,  bui,  etc.,  as  a  variation 
of  p  [tui  >  toi  {tuiy\,  we  have  a  logical  explanation  for  the 
whole  set.  What  renders  this  still  more  probable  is  the  fact, 
that  words  with  an  original  p — 2^^^  (puSt),  poi,  (potes),  voi 
(voles) — do  not  occur  under  the  forms  inii,  vui.  (Excepting 
an  isolated  example  of  'piue  in  FF,  p.  98  ;  and  put  occurs  in 
C  a  few  times  for  the  sake  of  rhyme). 

*  Which  was  suggested  by  d'Ovidio,  cf.  p.  59. 
"^Arch.  Glol.  It.,  IX,  40,  note  2. 


ITALIAN   POSSESSIVE   PRONOUNS.  63 

As  a  result  of  the  preceding  (Hscussion  it  appears  that  the 
three  forms — tui,  toi,  tuoi — arc  to  be  explained  as  follows  :  tui 
is  not  a  latinism,  nor  a  reduction  <  tuoi,  nor  formed  on  tlie 
singular  tuo,  but  a  variant  of  toi; — toi  is  not  a  reduction  of 
tuoi,  but  from  Ttji  directly  or  through  the  medium  of  *Tovi,  in 
either  case  with  an  o ; — tuoi  is  not  <  TUOS,  but  <  toi,  tOi. 
The  differentiation  of  the  Italian  from  the  other  Romance 
Languages  consists  in  the  development  of  this  g^uo  before  i, 
for  by  the  side  of  words  for  which  analogy  can  be  found  (soi : 
sous)  exist  noi,  vgi  >  nuoi,  vuoi  with  no  such  supposable  anal- 
ogy.    All  the  forms :  toi,  soi,  doi,  hoi  were  originally  with  g, 
for  the  u  in  the  variant  tui,  etc.,  could  not  be  from  an  p.    Either 
nuoi,  vuoi  must  be  analogous  to  tuoi,  suoi,  or  words  like  pgi, 
vgi,  POST,  v5les  with  an  original  o  must  have  influenced  other 
words  in  -pi  because  of  the  similarity  in  form  of  pgi,  vgi,  etc., 
with  the  words  in  -pi  {toi,  soi,  etc.),  so  that  all  were  diphthong- 
ized alike;  this  seems  the  preferable  explanation,  if  it  is  not 
considered  that  g  may  become  g  before  i  and  then  diphthongize. 

b.   tuo,  suo ;  tue,  sue,  etc. 

The  feminine  forms  toe,  soe,  doe,  etc.,  have  a  development 
parallel,  up  to  a  certain  point,  with  that  of  the  masculines ; 
that  is,  they  may  be  taken  as  directly  from  tuae,  or  from 
*tovae.^  Out  of  toe,  etc.,  develops  tue,^  etc.,  just  as  hue  is  < 
l)oe. — Similarly  in  the  singular  too,  toa;  soo,  soa  first  developed 
<*t6vum,  *t6vam  ;  *s6vuM,  *s6vam  ;^  then  the  o  in  too,  toa; 
soo,  soa  was  raised  to  u  by  hiatus  before  o  and  a  and  the  forms 
became  tuo,  tua;  suo,  sua.  Or  too,  toa;  soo,  soa  came  directly 
from  TUUM,  TUAM ;  suuM,  SUAM,  which  is  more  probable,  it 
having  been  shown  (p.  61)  that  a  v-stage  is  unnecessary. 


^For  AE>e,  cf.  Meyer-Lubke,  J<.  Gr.  ?  106:  "ae  [atonic]  wird  e;  le  aus 

ILLAE,  etc." 

*0r  one  might  easily  see  here  a  feminine  phiral  formed  on  the  singular  tua. 
3  Cf,  C'/  esiomasia,  p.  126,  line  234,  where  one  Ms.  reads  sovopio,  another  suo. 


64  L.    EMIL    MENGER. 


C.    Tonic  u  in  hiatus. 

Having  thus  disposed  of  hiatus  u,  it  is  not  difficult  to  formu- 
late a  law  for  the  words  in  which  u  occurs,  for  these  (as  well 
as  those  with  tj)  are  few ;  their  occurrence  in  the  list  of  texts 
examined  proves  that,  for  the  Tuscan,  u  in  hiatus  remains  u : 
cui,  fui,  lui,  costui,  grua}  These  words  never  give  in  Tuscan 
coi,^  foi,  loi,  costoi,  groa  ;  such  forms  are  avoided,  for  instance 
in  C  (p.  28)  occur  the  rhymes  alirui:  lui:  vui:  pui ;  p.  74, 
vui:  alirui:  sui:  fui;  p.  116,  colui:  vui:  lui:  sui  ;  p.  119, 
j)ui :  lui,  where  original  voi,  poi,  soi  are  changed  to  vui,  pui, 
sui  in  order  to  rhyme  with  fui,  lui,  instead  of  changing  the 
latter  to  *foi,  ^loi  to  rhyme  with  voi,  poi,  soi,  which  indicates 
a  strong  tendency  to  preserve  the  u. 

Co7iclusions. 

From  all  the  discussion  given  above  the  following  points 
may  be  postulated  : 

1.  All  words  with  tonic  o -\- i  diphthongize  (soi>s?m); 
noi  >■  nuoi,  etc.) ;  other  forms  {lui,  fui,  cui,  etc.)  do  not  diph- 
thongize ;  therefore,  before  diphthongization  takes  place,  an  o- 
stage  is  to  be  supposed.  This  o-  stage  (toi,  soi,  etc.)  appears  in 
Tuscan  ;  it  is  a  logical  explanation,  therefore,  to  derive  tuoi, 
suoi,  etc.,  from  it. 

2.  There  must  be  reason  why  other  words  {lui,  fui,  etc.)  do 
not  pass  through  this  o- stage;  this  cause  is  attributed  to  the 

^  Perhaps  also  frid  fructus  should  be  mentioned  here ;  it  occurs  in  P, 
Par.  XIX,  1,  rhyming  with  cui:  lui. — One  exception  to  the  rule  just  given  is 
found;  in  FF  occurs /woi:  p.  118:  non  so  si  fuoi  portato  o  s'io  sognai;  p. 
127:  io  fuoi  falconier  del  re;  p.  127:  di  Capouana  fuoi;  p.  129:  i'  fuoi 
Sanese ;  p.  130:  i'  fuoi  quel  Baldassare ;  p.  131 :  i'  fuoi  bon  soldata,  etc.,  pp. 
133,  135,  136,  138,  145,  161.  But  /oi  does  not  occur  here  or  elsewhere,  and 
fuoi  must  be  considered  as  analogical  to  vuoi  (voles),  puoi  (potes),  which 
are  of  frequent  occurrence  in  this  author. 

^Does  this  not  prove,  so  far  as  Italian  can  show,  that  u  in  cui  is  long? 
of.  Korting,   Wlb.  no.  6570. 


ITALIAN    POSSESSIVE   PRONOUNS. 


65 


varying  quantity  of  the  original  I^atin  vowel,  it  being  long  in 
lui,  fui,  etc.  Hence,  in  Tuscan,  Latin  iJ  in  hiatus  remains 
unchanged. 

3.  Latin  0  for  hiatus  position  develops  in  Tuscan  into  o, 
just  as  it  does  in  other  positions  :  tuam  >  tpa;  TtJl  >  toi,  etc. 
Both  this  n  <  fi  and  original  o  {noi  nOs)  before  i  may  diph- 
thongize, since,  in  Tuscan,  e  and  o  are  treated  as  e  and  o  before 
this  vowel  (i).  If  such  a  development  (o  >  no)  is  looked  upon 
as  doubtful,  toi,  soi,  etc.,  may  be  considered  to  have  developed 
by  analogy  to  poi  <  p6st,  voi  >  voles,  etc.,  words  exactly 
similar  in  form  and  with  original  o;  the  analogy  having 
worked,  all  alike  give  -uo:  puoi,  vuoi,  tuol,  suoi. 

Before  a  {tua),  e  {tue,  bue  <  boe),  o  (tuo),  o  is  raised  to  u. 


The  following  lists  show  the  relative  proportion  in  the  use 
of  hiatus  u  or  o  in  words  not  treated  in  the  preceding  pages. 
a  indicates  any  vowel.  The  dash  ( — )  is  used  to  indicate  syl- 
lal)les  that  follow  or  precede  the  accent. 


lid  — 

babbuino 

conlribuire 

abituale 

baluardo 

conventuale 

abituare 

belzuino 

cuccumo 

aceentuale 

bezzuarro 

defluire 

accenluare 

bruire, 

deostruire 

adduare 

buaccio 

desliluire 

affettuare 

buessa 

desiruente 

affettiwso 

huino 

diluire 

affiiuale 

casuale 

diminuire 

affluema 

censuule 

distribxdre 

afflaire 

censiudo 

duale 

aggraduirsi 

circomfiuenza 

duello 

alituoso 

circuire 

duino 

amminuire 

confluente 

eccetuare 

annuale 

confluenza 

effetUide 

annuire 

congj-uente 

effetuare 

aitenua7-e 

congruenza 

estenuare 

attxicde 

const  ilu  ire 

evacuate 

aiiuare 

construirt 

erentuale 

5 

66 


L.    EMIL    MENGER. 


fiuire 

proventimle 

oa 

fluttuare 

pruina 

fruire 

puntuale 

benzoafo 

fruttuare 

quatlriduano 

bemoino 

frvtluoso 

questware 

boaro 

genuino 

residuare 

boato 

(jesuita 

residuale 

doana 

graduare 

restituire 

eroessa 

graduire 

retribuire 

eroina 

gi-adwile 

rituale 

eraismo 

gratuire 

ruina 

gioire 

gruale 

ruire 

incoata 

gruino 

sensuale 

moine 

imhuire 

siriuoso 

oboista 

impetvMSO 

situare 

piroetla 

iviportuoso 

sentuoso 

poetna 

incestuare 

sostituire 

poeta 

incestuoso 

apirituale 

pToavo 

incruenlo 

statuare 

roano 

individuale 

slatuale 

soatto 

individuare 

statuino 

strettoitio 

induare 

statuetta 

infafuare 

sfatuista 

HO,  — 

influenza 

siatuire 

influire 

stenuare 

ubituatezza 

insiritiare 

strelluale 

accuorare 

iiistituire 

stribuire 

annualmente 

instruire 

suino 

arduamente 

intellettuale 

suismo 

asiiiduamente 

intuire 

taceuino 

attualniente 

intuarsi 

tatuaggio 

buacciolo 

irruema 

tatuarsi 

casualmente 

lutlunso 

testucde 

congruamente 

manuale 

tortuoso 

dimlnuimenlo 

menstruale 

triduano 

dbitribuitare 

mensuale 

tumulluare 

druidessa 

minuale 

tumuUuoso 

dualismo 

minufre 

untuoso 

duellare 

montuoso 

vacuare 

eccettuativo 

mutiianle 

vacuetto 

effellualmente 

ostruire 

inrtuale 

estenuativo 

perpetuate 

virtuoso 

fluitare 

perpeluare 

visucde 

gettuitajo 

perpeluanza 

volutuono 

ge.milare 

prOHtUuire 

ge.'^-uitesita 

ITALIAN    POSSESSIVE    PRONOUNS. 


67 


gradualmenU 

ineroicuix 

(juestudzione 

illuiare 

introilare 

siluazione 

indivldualismo 

ioideo 

sontuosamente 

individuidmeate 

masloideo 

spiritualizzare 

influitore 

metalloidale 

stenuazione 

intellettualmente 

morroidcUe 

tortuosamenle 

intuitivo 

ortoepia 

tumultuosamente 

manualmente 

poemetlo 

vacuuzione 

melifluamente 

poesia 

voluttuosamente 

mutuamente 

poetare 

perpeiiLalmente 

poetire 

oa - 

pituitaso 

poetino 

precipuamente 

romboidale 

alcoolizzare 

pruinoso 

salamojare 

eroicamente 

puntualmente 

sojare 

eroicizzare 

restituimento 

stoicisnu) 

moineria 

restribuimento 

tifoideo 

moiniere 

ritualismo 

poelizzare 

ritual  ista 

ua 

proemiale 

riiiuilmente 

proemiare 

ruinare 

affettuosamente 

proemizzare 

sensualismo 

attemiazLone 

stoicamcnt£ 

sensualista 

attualitaie 

sensualmente 

attuazione 

\m 

sostituitore 

circuizione 

spiritualismo 

duellatnre 

affetuevole 

spirititalista 

eccettuazione 

affituario 

spiritualmente 

effettuazione 

annuario 

statualmente 

effettuosamente 

attuario 

slenualivo 

estenuazione 

buaggine 

strenuamenle 

fluttuazione 

censuario 

superfluamente 

fortuiiamente 

diminuibile 

tenuemente 

fruizione 

druidico 

virtualmente 

graduatamente 

eleUuario 

(jraduazwne 

gesuilico 

oa    ' 

impetuosamente 

insinwabUe 

incestuosamente 

pecuaria 

boarima 

individuazione 

residuario 

coitaso 

insinuazione 

saniuaria 

concoidale 

intuizione 

statuaria 

conoidale 

luUuoitamenle 

tumultuarw 

convoitoso 

menstruazione 

usufruUuario 

emorroidcUe 

mostruosamente 

usuario 

epizoozia 

mutuazione 

voluttiiario 

incoativo 

paniuazione 

/!^\.' 


£^-jr 


ni 


68 


L.    EMIL    MENGER. 


oa- 


cloetico 

doario 

noetico 

poetico 

proavolo 

proemio 

zedoaria 


ua  — 

duellario 

graduatorio 

mutuaiario 

piluitario 

vacuatorio 


oa— 

emorroidai'io 

ua '-- 

gesidticamente 

gesuitofobia 

isluitivamente 

santuariamente 

spiritualizzamento 

tumuUtMriamente 


ua- 


affluere 

cercuito 

druido 

fortuito 

gratuito 

intuito 

pituita 

mere 


androide 

aracnoide 

asteroide 

aMroite 

benzoico 

cissoide 

coito 

cometoide 

concoide 

conoide 

coliloide 

emorroidi 

eroico 

eroide 

introito 

ioide 

jaloide 

lombricoide 

metalloide 

morroidi 

oasi 

odontoide 

romboide 

sesamoide 

sferoide 

stoico 

trapezoide 

zoilo 


oa 


allantoide 


addirizzatqjo 

beveratojo 

pastoja 

pensalojo 

riserbatqjo 

ritenitqjo 

salamoja 

saldatqjo 

salitojo 

scaldatojo 

scalzatojo 

scannatojo 

scappatoja 

scaricdtojo 

scaltalojo 


sehifanqja 

schizzatojo 

scoccatojo 

scolatqjo 

scorcitojo 

scorificatojo 

scorsqjo 

scorticatojo 

scolitojo 

scrittojo 

seccatqjo 

segnatqjo 

serbatqjo 

sferratoja 

soja 

sonatqjo 

spandHojo 

spazzatqjo 

spegnitojo 

spianalqjo 

spicciatqjo 

spogliatqjo 

stoja 

squartatyo 

stenditqjo 

strettqja 

strozattqjo 

svegiiatqjo 

svenatqjo 

svernatojo 

tagliatqjo 

temperatqjo 

tenitqjo 

tettoja 

tiratqjo 

toccalojo 

torcitojo 

trapanatcjo 

trebblatqjo 

ucellatoio 

varatojo 

vassqjo 

volgUqjo 

voltojo 


ITALIAN    POSSESSIVE   PRONOUNS. 


69 


/     .  ^ 

vacuo 

imptttMsitd, 

-^  ua 

>      «/v 

iviportuositcL 

annuo 

00, 

individualitd 

arduo 

alcool 

intellettuaiitd 

assiduo 

aloe 

manualitd 

congruo 

protonoe 

montuositd 

cospicuo 

mostruositd 

fatuo 

ua,  -^ 

perpetualild 

individuo 

promiscuositd, 

ingenuo 

arduitd 

puntualitd 

lituo 

assiduiid 

sensual  ltd 

mellijiuo 

congruiid 

sinuositd 

menstruo 

cospicuitd 

sontuosiid 

nottua 

fatuitd. 

splrllualitti 

pei-peluo 

gratuitd 

tortuosild 

perspicuo 

ingenuitd 

untuositd 

precipuo 

perpetuitd 

ventuositd 

proficuo 

perspicuitd, 

virtualitd 

promiscuo 

strenuitd 

voluttuositd 

queslua 

tenuitd 

residvA) 

vacuitd 

ua  — 

sperpetua 

veduitd 

statua 

insinuabilitd 

strenuo 

ua ^ 

saperfluo 

tenue 

casualitd 

lonitruo 

dualita. 

evoe 

treguo 

eventualitd 

oboe 

triduo 

fruttuositd 

sUoe. 

oe 


LIFE 


I  was  born  in  Clinton,  Miss.,  June  29,  1871.  I  was  graduated  from 
Mississippi  College  with  the  degree  of  A..  B.  in  June,  1888.  The  two 
following  years  I  was  Instructor  in  Latin  and  C4erman  in  the  Mary  Le 
Grande  Institute  ^female)  of  Vicksburg.  In  October,  1890,  1  entered  the 
Johns  Hopkins  University,  choosing  for  ray  major  subject  the  Romance 
Languages.  I  followed  the  lectures  of  Professor  A.  Marshall  Elliott, 
Doctor  H.  A.  Todd,  and  Doctor  F.  M.  Warren.  To  Professor  Elliott  I 
shall  always  feel  indebted  for  his  unvarying  kindness  and  accessibility; 
especially  do  I  now  appreciate  my  first  year's  work  with  him,  when  he 
united  the  skill  of  an  experienced  instructor  with  the  kindly  solicitude  of  a 
friend.  As  a  minor  subject  I  studied  History  under  the  instruction  of 
Professor  H.  B.  Adams;  my  examination  in  this  subject  was  on  the  Renais- 
sance in  Italy.  The  Summer  of  1891  I  spent  in  the  French  quarter  of  New 
Orleans,  La.,  to  acquire  a  speaking  knowledge  of  the  French  language ; 
I  there  pursued  a  course  of  private  lessons  in  French  with  Professor  Alc^e 
Fortier,  of  the  Tulane  I'niversity.  The  last  two  years  of  my  course  I  was 
under  the  instruction  of  Professor  Elliott  and  Doctor  .John  Ernst  Matzke. 
It  is  a  pleasure  to  record  the  interest  which  Doctor  Matzke  has  never  failed 
to  manifest  in  my  work.  May  to  October  of  1892  I  spent  in  Paris,  engaged 
in  studies  in  Modern  French  and  in  the  preparation  of  my  thesis  (cf.  p.  3). 
I  spent  two  weeks  also  in  London,  examining  in  the  British  Museum  the 
Ms.  of  an  old  French  poem  connected  with  the  work  of  the  Romance 
Seminary.  Since  June,  1892,  I  have  held  a  Fellowship  in  the  Romance 
Department  at  the  .Johns  Hopkins  I'niverity. 

Louis  Emil  Menoer. 


6A.LTIHOKE,  MABYI.AND, 

May  1,  IS9S. 


>'  or  iHs^' 


riTBRSITr 


V 


YC  00670 


r~ 


^99^^ 


THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


